Local History


The Origins

The first documentary reference to Eastcote was in the mid-thirteenth century, but it existed before that as a settlement near the River Pinn in a cleared area of woodland. It was part of the Manor of Ruislip, which was referred to in the Domesday Book of 1086. By the middle of the thirteenth century Ruislip was divided into three tithings: Westcote (the western settlement, now Ruislip), Ascot or Eastcott (the eastern settlement, now Eastcote) and Norwood (the settlement to the north of the woods, now Northwood).The divisions of Westcote and Ascott/Eastcott survived until 1833 before being discontinued as “useless and unnecessary”.

Farming and settlement

From medieval times until the twentieth century, the majority of the population in Eastcote was engaged in farming and related trades. Agricultural methods changed little from medieval times until the 1804 Enclosure Act. This resulted in large hedged fields being created predominately to the south where Eastcote bordered on to the parishes of Northolt and Greenford. Previously this area had been farmed as open arable fields divided into strips for cultivation by individual villagers. After enclosure, tracks leading to these strips from the village became a road, now the modern Field End Road.

A feature of Eastcote village was the many “ends”, mostly with small greens, which denoted the boundaries of scattered hamlets. Field End, at the junction of Field End Road with Bridle Road, stood at the end of the open fields, while Hale End, at the bend in the road near Highgrove, marked the western edge of the village. The eastern limit was Pope’s End at the junction of the High Road, Cheney Street and Cuckoo Hill.

Elizabethan buildings

By Elizabethan times the centre of Eastcote had become consolidated along the High Road and Field End, with a few scattered buildings along the ancient ways of Fore Street, Gowle (Joel) Street, Popes End Lane, Chaynye (Cheney) Street and Wylcher (Wiltshire) Street which led to the common pastures in the north. A document called the 1565 Terrier, drawn up by King’s College, Cambridge, the Lords of the Manor of Ruislip, to record their property, gives a good indication of the pattern of settlement in Eastcote. For example, listed in the High Road are Ramin, the Old Shooting Box, Flag Cottage, the Old Barn House and Eastcote Cottage, while in Fore Street there is Four Elms Farm. In Wiltshire Lane there is Ivy Farm and in Cheney Street is Horn End. It is very fortunate that a total of 19 buildings mentioned in this 1565 Terrier are still in existence in Eastcote, although some have been substantially altered.

Eastcote High Road showing Old Barn
House and tea gardens (on left), c1910
The Case is Altered, c1890
[credit: R. Gray]
Nineteenth century

Throughout the centuries agriculture was the mainstay of Eastcote. But it was the nineteenth century which saw the heyday of the gentry landowners, with their large estates, who provided employment for most of the villagers. Eastcote was the favoured location for the gentry rather than Ruislip or Northwood, with eight of their houses being found here. However in the 1850s and 1860s there was some more modest housing. Four pairs of villas known as Field End Villas were built which attracted the first group of professional people, such as bankers, doctors and civil servants to the area. They could combine having access to London with the rural delights of Eastcote, bearing in mind that the nearest stations at that time were Hatch End and from 1887 Pinner.

At the end of the century some larger architect designed houses were built for specific clients who welcomed the quiet and seclusion of the area. Two examples, both still standing, are Eastcote Point, Cuckoo Hill built in 1896 and Eastcote Place (now in Azalea Walk) built in 1897. The latter was requisitioned for various operations during the Second World War.

But despite the presence of this small group of professional middle class people, the overall feel of Eastcote was of an isolated, agricultural village with few facilities. There was no parish church; parishioners had to go to St Martin’s in Ruislip. However the seeds of Methodism had been sown by Adam Clarke, a Methodist scholar and preacher while he lived at Haydon Hall in the 1820s. As a result, in 1847, the Methodist Chapel was opened in Chapel Hill at the bottom of Field End Road and this provided the only place of worship until later developments in the twentieth century. The nearest schools were in Ruislip and Northwood apart from the small private institution of “Miss Carter’s Young Ladies School” at Flag Cottage, High Road which operated from 1887-1913.

The Great Houses

No history of Eastcote is complete without mentioning the three largest houses known as “the Great Houses” which were at the pinnacle of their importance in the nineteenth century. The first was Eastcote House, which started life as a timber-framed house called Hopkyttes. This was in the continuous ownership of the most prominent local family, the Hawtreys (later the Hawtrey Deanes), for over 400 years. This stability meant they were regarded as the most influential local family and they were viewed as the de facto lords of the manor. After the Enclosure Act they became the largest landowners in the parish after King’s College, Cambridge.

Eastcote House, 1930s
[credit: Hillingdon Local Studies]

Haydon Hall, 1950s

On the opposite side of the road to Eastcote House was Haydon Hall. This was built in 1630 by Lady Alice, Dowager Countess of Derby, but was completely rebuilt in 1720 in the classic style by new owner Thomas Franklin. In the nineteenth century Lawrence James Baker added two wings to the house and developed Haydon Hall as a shooting estate, building many attractive estate workers’ cottages such as New Cottages opposite Pretty Corner and Wood Cottages, Fore Street which still survive.

Highgrove House, 1882 [credit: Martin Pym]
Highgrove is the only “Great House” still standing although it was extensively restored after a major fire in 1978. The original building of 1747 was also destroyed by fire in 1879. The present restored house was designed by the noted Victorian architect Edwin Prior, a pupil of Norman Shaw. During the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries the Warrender family were the resident owners and Eleanor Warrender especially was well known for her good works in the neighbourhood.

Twentieth century – the early years

The extension, from Harrow to Uxbridge, of the Metropolitan Railway, which passed through Eastcote fields south of the village, was to change everything. Eastcote Halt opened in 1906 and Eastcote suddenly became accessible to many more people. The centre of Eastcote shifted south, away from the old village.

Eastcote Halt, 1930s [credit: Hillingdon Local Studies]
Hordes of day trippers arrived in Eastcote to enjoy the delights of the countryside and visit the tea gardens, in particular the Old Barn House in the High Road. Other cottages, such as The Rosery in the High Road and Orchard Farm in Field End Road also offered refreshments. Pubs did a good trade, especially the Ship in Joel Street which had its own garden pavilion. On a grander scale, the Pavilion Private Excursion Grounds in Northolt Road (now Field End Road) attracted thousands of school children who came for a day out in the 16 acres of pleasure grounds with swings and roundabouts, and donkey rides. The Cavendish Pavilion was built nearby as a private sports ground in 1914.

The Cavendish Pavilion

Developers saw the potential of Eastcote. “Arts and crafts” style houses appeared in Catlins Lane, Cheney Street and Bridle Road. Field End House farmland was sold to the British Freehold Investments Syndicate who laid out a network of roads, recognisable by the use of trees names for their roads. Individual plots were sold for building; the first houses appearing in Elm Avenue, Lime Grove, Myrtle and Acacia Avenues.

1920s and 1930s

Ralph Hawtrey Deane (of Eastcote House) sold off his lands along Field End Road. In the mid-1920s Tellings developed Morford Way and Morford Close and built Eastcote’s first row of shops, Field End Parade, along with a community hall which became the Ideal Cinema. Rotherhams Estates and T. F. Nash both built “Deane Estates”, Rotherhams on the west side of Field End Road, Nash on the east, along with the shops of Devon Parade and Deane Parade to serve the incomers needs. South of Eastcote Halt, building continued in Woodlands Avenue. Davis Estates built on the site of the Pavilion and developed the “Tudor” named streets across the road. Further north, the Eastcote Park Estate was built by Comben and Wakeling on Eastcote House grounds. Fore Street Farm was demolished to make way for a mixed development.

Rise in population

From just 600 people at the beginning of the century, by 1939 the population of Eastcote had increased to 15,000. This led to the establishment of a separate parish of Eastcote. The new church of St Lawrence opened in 1933. St Thomas More Catholic Church opened in 1937, and St Andrew’s Presbyterian Church (now United Reform) in 1939. Eastcote Halt could no longer cope with the increased number of travellers, so a new Eastcote station was built to the modernist designs of Charles Holden. It would have been officially opened in 1939 had the Second World War not intervened.

Eastcote’s secret

The significant part that Eastcote played in the Second World War was not known till many years later. The MOD site, between Eastcote Road and Lime Grove, was known during the war as HMS Pembroke. It served as an important outstation to the now renowned Bletchley Park. 800 Wrens, supported by 100 RAF technicians, operated 110 bombes, the machines which were used to identify and break German codes.​​  Further information about this is included below.

1950s and 60s

After the war, GCHQ operated from here, until it relocated to Cheltenham in 1954. The site, now known as Pembroke Park, is currently being developed for housing. Some of the people and places have been commemorated in the names of the roads and buildings.

Several old farms and cottages were demolished after the war. The Wesleyan Chapel in Field End Road was finally replaced by Eastcote Methodist Church, on the other side of the road, in 1951. The chapel was demolished in 1962. Of the three great houses, by now all in the ownership of the local authority, only Highgrove House has survived. Eastcote House was demolished in 1964, followed by Haydon Hall in 1967. However several new schools were built: Field End Junior (1947) and Infants (1951), Coteford Junior (1952), Newnham Junior and Infants (1952), St Nicholas Grammar (1955) and St Mary’s Grammar (1957), now combined as Haydon School, and a new public library (1959). The Community Centre in Southbourne Gardens opened in the 1950s.

Eastcote Station Today

Eastcote Shopping Parade Today

Eastcote is still evolving. There is regret at the loss of some of the historic buildings, yet many have survived. These, as well as many open spaces, including remnants of the parklands of old estates, serve as a reminder of times past.

Compiled by the Ruislip, Northwood and Eastcote Local History Society. ©RNELHS 2010

Initial House in Field End Road, Eastcote was demolished and re-built on the site of the former office building. See the Story here at my london_news
The street aspect of Initial House, Connex House and The Hallmarks (House) has changed significantly over the last decade with residential property predominating.


Changes at Queens Parade with the Southern Extension for the Sainsburys store (© Google 2008-2015)

Office to residential Conversions (© Google 2015-2020). To the South West of the train station the street-scape changes. Name changes are Luna Apartments & Solis apartments (formerly; Audit House (260); Canada House (272), Bellway House (262) Field End Rd)

Pre War

A descendant of an ancient Eastcote family reveals The Uxbridge Gazette via www.lawrence-rand travelled across the globe for a reunion at the site of her ancestral home. Jenny Armour flew from Australia, and on Thursday last week made her first visit to Eastcote House Gardens, the grounds former home of her ancestors The Hawtrey family. Mrs Armour emigrated to Australia more than 30 years ago, but once worked as a librarian at Ruislip Library. Despite living in Ickenham and then Ruislip from an early age, she did not learn of her family connection to the house until after she had moved Down Under. On a trip to England, she went to a conference about tracing your past. Organised by the BBC’s Who Do You Think You Are? programme, she learned she belonged to the Hawtrey family.

Fig. Shields of Prominent Families of Eastcote

The Hawtrey family lived in Eastcote House from 1525 when Ralph Hawtrey married Winifred Walleston and inherited her family cottage. Ralph built on the cottage and it became Eastcote House. It was lived in by the Hawtrey family and then their descendants the Deanes, for 400 years. Ralph Hawtrey was the 4th son of Thomas Hawtrey who then owned Chequers, which is now the country retreat of the Prime Minister. Mary Hawtrey, a grandaughter of Ralph and Winifred, married Sir John Bankes of Corfe Castle and Kingston Lacy and became Lady Bankes, heroine of the English Civil War when she defended Corfe Castle against Cromwell’s army for three years see landedfamilies-bankes-of-kingston-lacy. Seven of Lady Bankes’ 14 children were born in Eastcote and baptized at St Martin’s Church in Eastcote Road, Ruislip, where she is buried.

The family shields are formally described in heraldic terms as follows; On a lozenge: Sable, a cross engrailed argent (should be ermine) between four fleur de lys Or (BANKES). Impaling Argent, three lions passant guardant in bend sable crowned or double cotised sable (HAWTREY). Argent a bend wavy gules charged with three plates in dexter chief a rose gules (WARRENDER).

St Martin’s churchyard writes Mary Pache in rnelhs journals 2010 , is the memorial stone of Alice and Eleanor Warrender. They were of a family of six siblings with aristocratic roots in Midlothian. Their father was Sir George Warrender, 6th Baronet of Lochend and Bruntsfield, and they inherited Highgrove in 1894. Eleanor is remembered as the lady who lived at the big house. Fig. Shields of Prominent Families of Eastcote have the shields of each family; Bankes and and Hawtrey shields attrib – middlesex-heraldry.org.uk . Warrender shield attrib – wikimedia.org Blazon_of_Warrender_Baronets_of_Lochend. and wiki Line_engraving_of_Alice_Spencer (Works in public domain where the copyright term is the author’s life plus 100 years).

Fig. Shield of Eastcote Hypothetical/Supposition. A pentagonal shield with upper, centre and lower parts. The upper part could contain elements of the arms of a prominent families connected to Eastcote and a symbol from a prominent bygone Eastcote manor house. The centre part could contain the representations of Eastcote as an urban place. A number of candidates could be the Eastcote House stables, elements of the Middx shield, the RNUDC Shield, local architectural references, park or green spaces, bridges, railways, local churches, village references, geographic features or anything collectively the people wish for.

Fig. Shield of Eastcote Hypothetical/Supposition.

The symbols here are from the time just before south Eastcote was developed, the contribution towards the war effort and a nature element. A rollercoaster symbol (Icon made by Pixel perfect from www.flaticon.com)  License; Free for personal and commercial purpose with attribution) denotes the main attraction for Londoners for rest and recreation as Eastcote’s Fairgrounds south of the railway line lay in open lands meaning many thousands of visitors in its heyday.  The wartime effort is signified by the beacon (the symbol here sourced from The Book of Traceable Heraldic Art (editor; M. Cavalletto) free use within the Society for Creative Anachronism (SCA)), an early warning system against the approach of the enemy. It is depicted as a fire basket on a pole with a ladder leant against it. The River Pinn provides the nature element depicted by the bridge and blue channel. The nearest fairground reference in heraldic vocabulary is a pavilion tent with flag. However, this rollercoaster symbolises not only the fairground but also a vehicle and wheeled movement on rails of the modern day train. Lower right of centre part is a the Vine&Grape motif from the mezzanine banister posts of Eastcote House Garden stable. Upper right of centre part is a motif of the Tudor style decoration of Haydon House Lodge. The upper part or Chief takes Lion Passant Guardant, Ermine and a Fret. The lower part or base of shield could contain bend wavy with plates an element from the representation of another prominent family of Eastcote.


Try this at home. Perhaps, some designs could be posted here.


<<Figure journeys to Warrender Park just West of the Eastcote Main Parade. archive.hillingdon.gov.uk explains that the Park was part of the larger Highgrove Estate and was inherited by the Warrender family in 1894. Miss Eleanor Warrender sold just over 10 acres of the estate lying to the south to the Ruislip-Northwood Urban District Council in 1935 for use as a recreation area with a children’s playground, sand pit and tennis courts. There is the fine pair of ornamental wrought iron gates at the Lime Grove entrance. Made in the 1870s for the galleries of a famous London art dealer and in 1935 when they were replaced, the Eastcote Association managed to acquire them and arranged for them to be erected at Warrender Park.




Figure>> journeys to Eastcote House Gardens from Warrender Park. parksandgardens.org explains that ‘…..within the grounds are the old Coach house, 17th-century walled garden, 18th-century dovecote and a ha-ha. There are many fine mature trees and more recent garden features include a herb garden planted for Queen Elizabeth’s Silver Jubilee in 1977, orchard, rockery and wildflower meadow. History This is the gardens and small part of the former grounds of Eastcote House, the home of the Hawtrey family from 1532. Built on the site of an older house, Eastcote House stood close to the junction of Eastcote High Road and Field End. The grounds were purchased by Ruislip-Norwood UDC in 1938 as public open space. The house was initially used for communal activities but demolished as unsafe in 1964…..’ wikipedia EHG  states that ‘…..Hillingdon Council provided a £150,000 grant in September 2010 for the restoration of the buildings. In April 2011, the council joined with the Friends to seek funding of up to £1 million from the Heritage Lottery Fund for restoration work. The coach house was converted to a tea room. The gardens received the Green Flag Award in 2011….’


First World War

The significant part that Eastcote played in the First World War is embodied in the Eastcote Cross War Memorial. Fig 1 shows how the site was before the current layout that we see today. Fig 2 shows the original placement of the memorial.

Fig 1 Photograph courtesy of LBHillindon Archives featuring a pond at Field End Road, Eastcote. The picture was taken from Field End Road and shows a pond surrounded by trees. The pond is the site where the Eastcote War memorial and memorial gardens were erected in about 1929. (Image Digitally Modified). The Friends of Eastcote House Gardens Community Archive has the memorial plaque names with short biographies in the ‘Eastcote Remembers’ Booklet. The Commonwealth War Graves Commission (CWGC) honours all who died in the World Wars where the war dead can be searched and in many cases, there is a commemorative certificate, Grave Registration Report and headstone inscription details. Some of the named at the Eastcote Cross are buried at Ruislip (St. Martin) Churchyard Extension whilst some are buried in European CWGC cemeteries like Belgium and France. The War Memorial situated in St. Lawrence Church contains all the names of those who served as well as those who gave their lives. Other details of the Eastcote Cross structure itself are located at LBHillingdon’s website; War memorials in Eastcote. The figure also shows a 1915 article in the Lost Hospitals Of London reference the British Journal of Nursing, 16th October, 314-315 for the Voluntary Aid Division (VAD) of what is now the former Tudor Lodge Hotel nearby opposite to this site that was in use during WW1. Fig 2 opposite shows the Eastcote Memorial and the Roll of Honour includes Albert Thompson (11th Middlesex) lost at the Battle of Transloy Ridges on 8th October 1916. A sense of this time is gained from the source Wyrall, Everard. Die-hards in the Great War: Volumes I & II (p. 302). Lume Books. Kindle Edition ‘….The 1/7th and 1/8th Middlesex had been withdrawn with other troops of the 56th Division from the Battle of Le Transloy on 9th October, 1916, and had then moved to Flesselles, 8 miles from Amiens. The 1/7th had come out of the line terribly weak. Of the 41 officers who had taken part in the actual fighting only 3 remained….’  and William Samuel Thomas Vines (27th Middlesex) lost at Messines 8th June 1917 ‘….Along the whole of the Messines front watchers were now gazing with scarce-controlled emotions so soon to be turned into an inferno…..’
Wyrall, Everard. Die-hards in the Great War: Volumes I & II (p. 348). Lume Books. Kindle Edition. The Lineage of the Middlesex Regiment is chronicled by the RNELHS Journal 2000 (Eileen M. Bowlt In Defence of the Realm) and Historical Records Of The 57th West Middlesex Regiment Of Foot 1788 To The Present Time 1878
Fig 2 The Original 1921 location was the junction of Bridle Rd and Field End Rd, the Eastcote Cross with three plaques: To commemorate the dead of WW1 and WW2 records all the Eastcote men who served in HM forces, volunteers and the wounded who passed through Eastcote VAD Hospital (rnelhs article) photo © IWM Q 50541. There is some background to the move to the current location in the rnelhs journal 00/01. The construction follows the Blomfield’s Cross of Sacrifice design and evolution of this is explained at wikipedia Designing_the_Cross_of_Sacrifice. The proportions of the cross, with short arms close to the top of the shaft are similar to some Celtic crosses,[43] the crossarm being one-third the length of the shaft, the crossarms being irregular octagons in section. There is a stylized bronze longsword that points down and is fastened to the front of the cross. Contrast this design with Luyten’s design were the crossarm is severely truncated in nearly all these crosses, barely extending from the shaft. Two examples are Common at Abinger, Surrey, and outside Ravenglass, Cumbria—both erected in 1920. The second photo © IWM Q 796 Soldiers of the 16th (Public Schools) Battalion, the Middlesex Regiment of the 29th Division parading at ‘White City’ opposite Hawthorn Ridge for the attack on Beaumont Hamel. Behind them is a group from the 2nd Battalion, the Seaforth Highlanders of the 4th Division. It is one of a collection at iwm.org MiddlesexRegiment

If one person’s life history can be explored, Eastcote Cross Roll Of Honour Tone Bayetto might represent the people from our local area that were defending the realm over 100 years ago. Bayetto’s biography is detailed here at Timeline of Tone & his family Another documentation suite is entered in the Imperial War Museum website at livesofthefirstworldwar.iwm.org. Fig 3 is Tone Bayetto in 1913 with kind attribution; Royal Aero Club Trust. There is also a ‘postcard’ of Tone Hippolyte Bayetto at the ScienceAndSociety Collection of c2,800 pictorial cards, c1890s-1940s / amassed by Miss Winifred Penn-Gaskell her collection illustrating the development of international air post 1870-1950. There are also references to Tone Bayetto at the greatwarforum.org thp-bayetto. Born in 1892, the family moved to Eastcote in Oct 1913. Tone Bayetto joined the Royal Flying Corps in 1915, saw Air combat by 1916, crashed during combat and hospitalised in Sept 1917. Returned to duties but on 28 July 1918, his plane crashed during a test flight whereupon he was killed. Tone Hippolyte Bayetto; Remembered in Ruislip (St. Martin) Churchyard, Honoured at Eastcote Cross.

Whilst Eastcote Cross Roll Of Honour Roland Butler (1st/9th Middlesex Regiment) lies buried at the Baghdad (Yarbashi) War Cemetry  one of his Regiment’s movements in the region was during The Blockade of Najaf where ‘….On the 22nd (March 1918), “A” and “C” Companies of the 1/9th Middlesex reached Blockade Post, some 1,300 yards east of Najaf, where with other units of the Brigade they took part in establishing a cordon from south to north-west around the city. Nine picquets (numbered from the left) with Blockade Post as headquarters, were formed, Nos. 1, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 by the Middlesex, and 2, 3 and 4 by the Punjabis. One platoon was allotted to each post with Lewis guns or machine guns. During the morning there was a good deal of sniping from the city walls and from the graveyard, the rebels finding excellent cover on the high walls and in the bastions….’ Wyrall, Everard. Die-hards in the Great War: Volumes I & II (p. 557). Lume Books. Kindle Edition. A 13th Annual Report from the Imperial War Grave Commission (1933) says ‘Thanks to the kindness of His Majesty King Feizal, who has allowed water to be taken from the wells of the Royal Estates, it is now possible to irrigate the whole of the Baghdad North Cemetery area,…laying out irrigation channels. An intensive planting of trees and shrubs … eucalyptus, palms, oleanders, roses, dodones, tamarisk, Persian lilacs, etc. The borders of the irrigation channels have been planted with special flower-beds…’ Today, conditions are different as explained in an article in TheTimes ‘Iraqi-keeper-begs-for-help-to-save-british-war-graves’ which serves to remind us the imperative to maintain our soldiers’ war graves. Eastcote Cross Roll Of Honour Gerald Charles Bonny lies at Alexandria (Hadra) Egypt Commonwealth Commission War Grave shown in Fig 4…… attrib. Roland Unger Creative Commons Licenseunder a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 Generic License)……and fortunately as can be seen, the site condition is maintained in respectful excellence. The Blomfield’s Cross of Sacrifice like at Eastcote, is the cemetery focal point. Click on the photo to go to the CWGC entry for Alexandria (Hadra) War Memorial Cemetery. Even though overseas sites are being restored such as here telegraph-british-WW2-heroes-restored-iraq at home we still have as issues as explained here in theguardian-vandals-smash-war-graves-west-yorkshire or abroad such as here telegraph-Iraq-cemetery-containing-graves-of-British-servicemen-is-destroyed. ‘….If an analysis be made of the War efforts of the Cities, Towns and Counties, which go to form the United Kingdom, it will be found that from a military standpoint, no county can claim to have done more during the years 1914-1918 than the County of Middlesex…..’ Wyrall, Everard. Die-hards in the Great War: Volumes I & II (p. 9). Lume Books. Kindle Edition. The CWGC architectural and historic form is revealed here and The National Characteristics Of Cemeteries is explained here

Second World War

Fig 1 Cryptographic Binary Traffic. Click on this picture to go to Tony Sale’s (historian of computing, lead constructor of the functional Mark 2 Colossus computer) website that has an array of articles on Codes&Ciphers and a report about the United States 6812th Division seconded to the Bombe outstation at Eastcote in 1944. Code Breakers at Eastcote by Susan Toms is recorded here at the rnelhs. ‘….Colossus marched on into the early Cold War period. The last two Colossus II machines were assembled at Eastcote rather than Bletchley, and code-named ‘Blue’ and ‘Red’. These were rebuilt between 1948 and 1951, before being taken to Cheltenham in 1953 and employed until 1961. Also using the Colossus circuits were four new Robinson machines that were installed at Eastcote…..’ p.371 Aldrich gchq-the-uncensored-story-of-britains-most-secret-intelligence-agency

Fig 2 Not far from Eastcote’s Station Y, more evidence of American presence here officers mingling with British personnel at the Headquarters of the 9th Troop Carrier Command on  26 Apr 1944 at Eastcote Place. Attrib. © IWM at americanairmuseum.com. The rnelhs.org.uk also has a lot about Eastcote/ Bletchey Park connections which is featured in their book The Home Front that can be found and purchased under the publications section. The history of Eastcote Place is described in RNELHS 1999 Journal p.16 by Eileen M Bowlt entitled Plockettes to Eastcote Place. In 1940 it was used as an Operations Room for Northolt

Fig 3 Wrens in the Bombe Bays at Eastcote outstation Fig 4 Bombe Operator Interview

The Fig 3 archive picture brings to life the story of ‘The History Behind The Road Names For Pembroke Park, Eastcote’ at this rnelhs journal 2009 which explains that each bay was named after one of the allied countries and housed about eight bombe machines. The bays in this picture are Larissa, Athens & Corinth.____________________________________________________________________GCHQ © Crown Copyright 2016. Bletchley Park Trust

Fig 4 Bombe Operator Interview Ruth Bourne in front of a reconstructed Bombe. Photo: Charles Coultas. mylondon.news  remembering the code-breaking women who fought the war from a secret site in Eastcote. theregister gives a bletchley_bombe_operator_interview. See also the lawrence-rand article remembering-the-codebreaking-women-who-fought-the-war-from-a-secret-site-in-eastcote.html. ‘….Ruth recalls feeling weighed down by her unwieldy kitbag on the long walk from Eastcote tube station — after a brief induction at Bletchley Park she’d been transferred to this north London suburb. Here, for security reasons, 120 Bombe machines were housed in what had become Bletchley Park’s larg- est outstation. Ruth eventually arrived at two purpose-built Ministry of Defence blocks; flanked by armed military police and surrounded by thick brick walls, one of these was to be her new workplace….’ p.125 The Bletchley Girls Tessa Dunlop

Fig 5 Click on this Figure to listen to Podcast 80 – Eastcote: From GC&CS to GCHQ at bletchleypark.org.uk. It includes the speeches at Pembroke Park on the unveiling of the plaque commemorating the site.

Shaping the Main Parade Today; ​Shopfronts National and Borough Wide Planning Guidance

The National_Model_Design_Code.pdf  from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government provide detailed guidance on the production of design codes, guides and policies to promote successful design. Page 22 section 53 says;…. The identity of an area comes not just from its built form and public spaces but from the design of its buildings. This is not about architectural style, but about key principles of building design. All new buildings should relate to the architectural character and materials of the surrounding area…….  

Fig 1 section 53 says the identity of an area comes … from the design of its buildings… not architectural style, but … building design… such as base of the building and thresholds, windows,fontage variation detailing. © Crown copyright, 2021

Fig 2 design of windows based on the character of the area. Glazing proportions may vary (allowing fully glazed façades) but glazing ratios might be limited to 35%. Guidance can direct window orientation and depth of reveals. © Crown copyright, 2021


The National_Model_Design_Code.pdf section 53 part vii proposes guidance on Detailing: ……….The use of colour, quality of materials and detailing, drawn from the surrounding context, e.g. an area might be characterised by the use of a particular type of brick. A degree of complexity will ensure that buildings are attractive from a distance and close-up……. The figure below shows how depth and interest can be created with window details. Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) are prepared by Borough Councils as part of its planning policy framework. 

Fig 3 Detailing: Guidance may be provide use of colour, quality of materials and detailing. Some complexity ensures that buildings are attractive from a distance and close-up. © Crown copyright, 2021

Fig 5 shows architectural and streetscape setting viewpoints. Vertical emphasis – pilasters, doorways, window groupings, horizontal emphasis stall risers, window, fascias, groupings noting asymmetrical but balanced and symmetrical arrangements. Signs, blinds, lighting, and security measures should be designed as an integral part of any new or altered shopfront proposal.Materials and detailing should be high quality; durable; and appropriate to the building and its context. Glossy surfaces, aluminium or uPVC are not normally appropriate within Conservation Areas.Shopfronts should complement the design of the building as a whole, adjoining buildings and the wider street taking into account the age; history; scale and proportion; symmetry and rhythm; architectural style; and materials. © Burnley Council 2019

West Suffolk Shopfront and Advertisement Design Guidance  Feb 2015 says;……. Good design and high qualityenvironment go hand in and. A carefully designed and eye-catching shopfront is good for business and can make a positive contribution to the character of the street and the vitality of our retail areas…….. Hillingdon’s Supplementary Supplementary Design for shopfronts is incorporated Hillingdon’s Local Plan Part 2 – Development Management Policies and says; …..Good design and high qualityenvironment go hand in and. A carefully designed and eye-catching shopfront is good for business and can make a positive contribution to the character of the street and the vitality of our retail areas….

The scale, height and proportions of a shopfront should be in proportion with the buildings as a whole. The shopfront and any upper floors should work together rather than separately. Vertical sub-divisions should be used to retain the appearance of separate shops. This can be done by retaining dividing pilasters and respecting differences in adjacent fascias and stall risers. Individual fascias should be used. © West Suffolk Design Guidance Feb 2015

1 fanlight 2 fascia and lettering 3 cornice 4 corbel or bracket 5 capital 6 pilaster 7 plinth 8 panelled stall riser 9 window sill 10 projecting sign 11 transoms and mullions 12 blindbox. The Council will encourage the retention of traditional shopfront features and where appropriate, the reinstatement of these features where they have been lost.encourage the use of traditional design features and does not consider existing shopfronts of poor or unsatisfactory design to be a precedent or a reference in assessing site context and the wider character of an area


<< Figure © 2021 Google. Eastcote is a pre war main parade but modern shopping parades adopt the practices outlined above. Here is a new development in Colindale North London. Fascias are aligned horizontally and have separation from the residential upper storeys. Signage is simple but effective, balanced between commercial premises and placed within shop frontage (the shop glazing extent). There is natural separation between shopfronts and whilst there are no pilasters, the brickwork from the upper storeys is retained (at ground level). Shopfront mullions are in consistent pitch along the parade. Clutter is minimised with no hanging signs, awnings, wires, hooks, alarm boxes etc. the commercial premises have the required signage.



Figure>> © 2021 Google. Just around the corner of the main parade above is a sun drenched smaller shopping parade. Modest in scale nonetheless the clean lines are pleasing. Internal air conditioning and solar reflecting tinted glazing obviate soft fabric, cumbersome awnings. Whilst modern designs bypass classical features and motifs nevertheless repetition, proportion, vertical emphasis, coherent colour rendition and ground floor to upper floor consistency combine to provide an active street scene.




Defensible Space Theory Part 1

In his book available online at defensiblespace , concern over high crime rates and deteriorating inner-city neighbourhoods has reawakened interest in Defensible Space, architect Oscar Newman’s groundbreaking physical design approach to crime prevention. Creating Defensible Space, written by Newman published by HUD’s Office of Policy Development and Research, looks at  “Defensible Space” projects since the early 1970s. This publication provides an expert review of the “Defensible Space”

Fig 1 Oscar Newman’s Defensible Space Book Cover

Defensible Space Theory Part 2

In his book available online at Defensible Space, Oscar Newman goes onto explain the effect of building type on residents’ control of streets. Examining different building types from the viewpoint of residents’ ability to exert control over surrounding streets.

Fig 1 shows a 3-story garden apartments built at a density of 36 units to the acre. The rear courts within the interior of each cluster have been as-signed both to individual families and to families living on the ground floor have been given their own patios within the interior courts with access to them from the interior of their unit. These patios are therefore private. The remainder of the interior court belongs to all the families sharing a cluster and is only accessible from the semiprivate interior circulation space of each building, making the remainder of the interior cluster semiprivate.

Fig 1 3-story garden apartments

Figure 2 shows a highrise superblock at a density of 50 dwelling units to the acre. The grounds around the buildings are accessible to everyone and are not assigned to particular buildings. The residents, as a result, feel little association with or responsibility for the grounds and even less association with the surrounding public streets. Not only are the streets distant from the units but no building entries face them. The grounds of the development are also public. All the streets and grounds are public. All the grounds of the project must be maintained by management and patrolled by a hired security force. The city streets and sidewalks, in turn, must be maintained by the city sanitation department and patrolled by city police.

Fig 2 High-rRse Superblock

Fig 3 shows a comparison of developments 2 radically different building configuration: in this case a density of 40 units to the acre with 1-to-1 parking. This is a very high density that will satisfy the economic demands of high land costs. The ‘walkup’ development achieves the same density as the highrise by covering more of the grounds (37% ground coverage versus 24%). Municipalities that wish to reap the benefits of ‘walkup’ versus highrise buildings must learn to be flexible with their floor-area-ratio requirements to assure that they are not depriving residents of a better housing option in order to get more open ground space that has little purpose.

Comparison-ofdevelopments-subdivided-differentlyFig 3 Comparison of Developments

Defensible Space Theory Part 3

Michael Kimmelman wrote at nytimes ‘penn-south-and-pruitt-igoe’

Pruitt-Igoe was the notorious St. Louis public-housing complex, demolished in 1972. Penn South is a cooperative in affluent, 21st-century Manhattan past which chic crowds hustle every day to and from nearby Chelsea’s art galleries, apparently oblivious to it. It thrives within a dense, diverse neighbourhood of the sort that makes New York special. Pruitt-Igoe, segregated de-facto, isolated and impoverished, collapsed along with the industrial city around it.

Fig1 Penn South NY Credit…Richard Perry/The New York Times

The thriving Penn South in Manhattan has much in common architecturally with Pruitt-Igoe, the outcomes being very different. They’re both classic examples of modern architecture,

Pruitt-Igoe was alienating, penitential breeding grounds for vandalism and violence. In Penn South, it worked. In St. Louis, where the architectural scheme was the same, what killed Pruitt-Igoe was not its bricks and mortar. (Minoru Yamasaki, who designed the World Trade Towers, was the architect.)

The two projects, aesthetic cousins, are reminders that no typology of design, no matter how passingly fashionable or reviled, guarantees success or failure.

Fig2 Pruitt-Igoe

Like Pruitt-Igoe, Penn South was a midcentury slum-clearance project. Designed by Herman Jessor as a modern cooperative for working class families, backed by the International Ladies Garment Workers Union, it called for 10 buildings spread across 20 acres between Eighth and Ninth Avenues, from 23rd Street to 29th Street. Two bedroom apartments cost $3,000 when the complex opened in 1962. (Those same apartments now sell for $100,000.) President John F. Kennedy stood atop a flag-decked dais in the bright May sun to dedicate it.

Steady income from maintenance payments and retail units in commercial buildings the co-op owned guaranteed Penn South a stable income. Tax relief from the city shielded it from escalating real estate values. Residents poured money into improvements. Repeatedly they declined the right to sell their apartments at market rates, preserving the ideal of moderate-income dwellings, adding facilities for toddlers and the elderly, playgrounds, a community garden and a ceramics studio.

It turns out that the very architectural traits that conventional wisdom said made tower-in-the-park projects like Pruitt-Igoe inhumane actually make these buildings ideal for retirees: the elevators and communal spaces, the enclosed green areas where it’s possible to walk safely, the openness and in-house programs.

Once again architecture evolves in bottom-up ways that architects and planners can never fully predict. 

Defensible Space Theory Part 4

While form is important, e.g., the “lessons” learned by Oscar Newman in what he called “Defensible Spaces,”  the real lesson is that the importance of form is not merely about the physical,

Fig 1,2,3,4 The Pruitt-Igoe Demolition Sequence. What Are The Lessons?

At shelterforce.org the article  Public Housing: Building Communities vs. Providing a Place to Live By Richard Layman says successful housing isn’t merely a function of its form—design is not destiny—it’s also a function the economic and social mix present within the communities.  what if the “demographics” of the tenants aren’t favourable to the development of strong public housing communities? Neal Peirce has a column, “A Nation of Public Housing,”about public housing in SingaporeSingapore, known for strong social control systems.

Fig 5 Singapore Towers

People can “move up” to larger units or different communities as their households and lives change. Singapore also subsidises social clubs of all types, and these programs are also present within public housing projects.The public housing program also confers to the tenant a kind of ownership interest in the apartment that can be sold, which helps build not only the “sense of ownership”

Lessons Learnt

  1. Commit to the creation of high quality housing that lasts as opposed to value-engineered construction that doesn’t last (the money might not be there for rebuilding when the time comes…);
  2. Inclusion of civic amenities (playgrounds, etc.) built into the project to build complete communities;
  3. Complementary social and community support and development programs;
  4. Provision of a variety of housing sizes and places to live;
  5. Elements of ownership: tenant has equity position/ownership interest in the property which can be sold/transferred, and contributes to the household wealth portfolio;
  6. Depending on the location of the project, integration of retail and other commercial spaces.

Defensible Space Theory Part 5

There are numerous references to CPTED online a couple of resources here wbdg.org and here  wmaproperty.com are referred to below. CPTED evolved out of the USA. The UK has a similar version called by a different name – Secure By Design.

Safety in a neighbourhood has become a major concern by any potential home buyer, current residents and property developers alike as the value of a property can be affected by crime in the neighbourhood. A gated and guarded neighbourhood would be sufficient to reduce the crime but this is ‘yesterdays’ version of safety and security. Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) a multi-disciplinary approach to deter criminal behaviour through environmental design.

Fig 1 CPTED Features

CPTED strategies are implemented by:

  • Electronic methods: Electronic access and intrusion detection, electronic surveillance, electronic detection, and alarm and electronic monitoring and control
  • Organisational methods: Manpower, police, security guards, and neighbourhood watch programs
  • Architectural methods: Architectural design and layout, site planning and landscaping, signage, and circulation control. See below for further information.

Defensible Space; Oscar Newman coined the expression “defensible space” as a term for a range of mechanisms, real and symbolic barriers, strongly defined areas of influence and improved opportunities for surveillance that combine to bring the environment under the control of its residents.
Natural Access Control; design streets, entrances, and neighbourhood gateways to mark public routes and by using structural elements to discourage access to private areas.

Fig 2 Access Control

Natural Surveillance; natural surveillance maximises visibility of people, parking areas, and entrances. Examples are doors and windows that look onto streets and parking areas, pedestrian-friendly streets, front porches and adequate night-time lighting.
Territorial Reinforcement; define property lines and distinguish private spaces from public spaces, such as landscape plantings, pavement design, gateway treatments and fences.

Fig 3 Surveillance

Management And Maintenance; maintain neighbourhoods and residences and keep security components in good working order.

Legitimate Activity Support; a space or dwelling is encouraged through the use of natural surveillance and lighting and architectural design that clearly defines the purpose of the structure or space.

Fig 4 Legitimate Activity Support;


Defensible Space Theory Part 6

Fundamentally, security for the built environment is depicted in Fig 1 (see saferspaces.org.za ). 

Fig 1 Courtesy of saferspaces.org.za

The terms used in Fig 1 have moved on and the latest terms are shown below with accompanying visual examples.

The UK’s interpretation of Defensive Space began with  gov.uk saferplaces  now archived and is now branded as Secure By Design the latest version is here ; securedbydesign – guides

Permeability or Access and Movement (Access and Escape Routes)

Fig 2 isolated routes such as this alleyway provide opportunities for access to the rear of buildings, and can become natural habitats for crime and anti-social Behaviour.
Fig 3 Alley-gating creates space that only residents can access. Middlesborough.







Defensive Perimeter

Fig 4 Private or communal defensible space provided within a block structure. Manchester
Fig 5 The flat is a typically secure dwelling type, with limited exposure to the public realm. St James Park, Surbiton






                                      Passive Surveillance

Fig 6 Many standard house designs do not include windows in the sides of end terraces, reducing surveillance and encouraging graffiti and nuisance. Both of the blocks in this example, Newhall, Harlow, incorporate generous windows into their ends
Fig 7 In the absence of active frontages, the only surveillance offered by this street is by users passing through it.








Ownership (Territoriality)

Fig 8 Low fences in front of houses creating a safe and attractive environment. Bishop’s Mead, Chelmsford.


Fig 9 As nobody has asserted their ownership over this space, accepted behavioural norms do not apply, leading to a higher risk of crime and anti-social behaviour








Target Hardening

Fig 10 Secure doors and entryphone systems protect multiple occupants. Cromer Street, Camden.







Management and maintenance

Fig 11 The low crime levels of the car park and public space at-Bristol is in part a result of constant surveillance by around 75 CCTV cameras.
Fig 12 At the Orchard, Fairford and Allcourt, Lechdale, a management trust is responsible for ground maintenance and a high quality public realm.