west norwood?

[manitz]

we living in north west london (just). DH has to cycle to camden so we want to move to a bigger house but nothing coming up in our area, plus it's metroland so not many houses to choose from. Woudl like to move to somewhere which is no more than 10 miles from camden but where we can afford a house and which might have the odd nice pub and school. Does it exist? west norwood seems to offer the type of house we might like but what is it like??
thanks

There are several threads about it on here if you search - one I remember uses the great phrase "has stubbornly resisted gentrification". That's pretty accurate as regards the high street. It's got lots of decent shops, but isn't what you'd call nice exactly. But it is very close to Crystal Palace and Dulwich, which are generally much nicer (and better for pubs, restaurants etc), and it has good transport links, okay schools and is affordable. So I guess I'd recommend opting for somewhere in the area, but if you can afford it, get closer to the nicer bits, or maybe Gipsy Hill or Streatham Common end. And if schools are important, be v careful about catchments (as ever!). There are big stretches where you can get great period houses at a decent price because it's a school blackhole.

great, thanks. will do a search

We looked and thought it was really rough. We bought in Crystal Palace in the end.

Try looking around Upper Norwood instead maybe. Your DH will have a big hill to bike up but it'll be worth it!

Have you looked at Barnet? Brilliant schools.

I've just done up a flat in SE21 which borders West Norwood but is much nicer and still, for London, very good value. Have you looked at the roads (I think one of them is called Broxbourne Ave) that run from Streatham to West Norwood? They seem better too and are in catchment area for Dunraven secondary school.

he loves a hill. so upper norwood is better? will have a look, i know notthing about this area (apart from having a dreadful teenage shag boyfriend from there - enough to put me off) didn't even realise they were distinct places thought was all one and the same. Have looked at barnet but tbh the architecture wasn't as appealing, still bearing it in mind and searching. We are also considering wembley.

thanks lalalonglegs x post. have to do some mothering now and will come back on and follow up leads this eve.

Norwood is pretty huge so Upper Norwood (which becomes C Palacey) is different kettle of fish to West (which becomes Tulse Hilly) and different again to South (cheaper, more Croydony). Definitely worth driving around and exploring as can vary so much just within a few minutes. I much prefer Upper.

Ooh, I think I technically live in upper Norwood (though postcode is se19). It's really lovely here. DH has a beast of a hill to cycle up...he likes it too weirdo

We have lived in West Norwood for the last seven years and are really happy here - so much so we have just sold our first place and bought a new house 2 streets away! Would agree with previous comments about living at the Gipsy Hill/Streatham Common end though - the Tulse Hill end is definitely not as nice.

There are lots of things we love about it. Commuting from here to work in central London is super-easy - 20 mins to Victoria, 25 to London Bridge, 4 trains an hour to each and you can pretty much always get a seat in rush hour. The houses are actually affordable - we own a nice 3-bed semi on a nice road with a biggish garden for what you would pay for a 1-bed flat in Camden. There are loads of green spaces within walking distance - we are right next to a park with a great playground for DS, aged 2, and within walking distance of Crystal Palace, Dulwich and Brockwell Parks, plus Streatham Common. And we are within easy walking distance to Crystal Palace/Dulwich/Herne Hill. Plus the views are amazing.

It also has the excellent 'Feast' food/craft fair every month, plus two fishmongers, a nice deli, a great bakery, 2 good coffee shops, and 3 small supermarkets. There are a few nice pubs too, though more in surrounding areas than in W Norwood itself. And W Norwood cemetery is lovely. Plus at the Gipsy Hill end the primary schools are great.

Sure there are parts that are a bit dodgy, and it doesn't have the most attractive high street in the world, but I have never ever felt scared walking home alone late at night here, and I can't say the same for when I lived in Chiswick or Balham!

Another vote for West Norwood here. 10 years and counting and can totally vouch for everything in OneLittleHoppers post (in fact, judging from her description I think I may even live on her road!)

I llive close to W Norwood, and think it is in a great general area. Good Thameslink and other rail links, too, if you need to get to C LOndon without the bike.

Streatham Hill also good residentially, and relatively affordable in comparison to other similiar areas with good transport. No-one is going to fall in love with Streatham High Rd, but it does have the convenience of a multi-screen cinema, good shopping and an increasing number of nice places to eat.

What age schools are you looking for? You need to be vey precise about catchments - though there are lots of excellent school options in Streatham Hill and W Norwood. In the right roads.

You could find somewhere which is in catchment for Julians Primary and then Dunraven, or Streatham Wells Primary and then Dunraven, for example.

all ages really. we have four kids between 9 and 1 so secondary in 2 years time and primary for ds1. prefer mixed sex schools and have a mix of sexes. would want this to be our final family home. its the right road bit that im interested in. also we currently border a park and it would be important to also be near good outdoor space.

its just not that easy for us to pop down and do the homework that we can do on the affordable places nearer to us. it seems cheap on rightmove but is it a long term family place (ie good enough secondary education, nice outdoor space, a feeling of community) or is it cheap and nasty??!

all the posts on this thread have been very positive and helpful so far. thanks

OP, it's rough round the egdes but has nice residential 'bits', especially High street (not exactly clean), all depends on your definiton of "nasty"! what areas of London do you know, for comparison? say it's nothing like as nice as Balha, even though balham is worse than some other areas. But i think it's better than the further-out parts of Tooting.

meaning, especially High st. is a bit rough.

OP - in terms of it being a long-term family place, I would say yes to the outdoor space and feeling of community, but the secondary education provision is nowhere near as good as the primary. Like others have said, you would definitely need to look carefully at catchment areas - probably roads on the Streatham side of Knights Hill are your best bet for Dunraven and Julians primary. I confess, our longer-term plan is to move when DS reaches secondary school age, unless things improve a lot over the next ten years...

Think about where friends and family are in the rest of the country. We're in SE London, and driving west or north for the weekend takes ages. If you live in nw now, it's something to factor in when you think about moving. That aside, it's great here. Se19 is much nicer than west Norwood though!

I'm in West Norwood, and I'd agree that it's not a bad place on the whole. However if I had a choice, I definitely prefer to be in Upper Norwood/Crystal Palace or further down towards where it borders with Streatham (around Leigham Court Road) I generally avoid the High Street and pop up to Crystal Palace to shop.

Mixed Secondary School from here would be Elm Green (fairly new, but heard good things), Norwood School (which I personally didn't like) Kingsdale (lottery to get into I think?) and a Harris Academy. My older DC go to Dunraven but we were living within catchment when DS1 got in, we'd never manage that now.

I agree with BananaPie - to stay nearby because of possible family and friend connections, plus easier for hs commute. Maybe North Finchley is affordable or Barnet?

thanks everyone. we lived in stepney/whitechapel for ten years. moved to nw because of my family who are nearby. Dh family are in sw london borders. Ideal place to live betw the two would be heathrow or hanwell.I loved E london but finances meant we couldn't move up, plus there were massive language issues as the majority of population were new immigrants so it seemed quite segregated but my kids were preschool so maybe that would have got better. lots of mc children schooled out of the borough, often privately ie st pauls etc which is not an option.

I suppose if it wasn't for dh's bike i'd prob prefer to move a bit further out for more space. BUT he really loves cycling and I think he'd insist on cycling anyway and we would have less family time, he cycles about 10 miles now - takes an hour. Besides I really like london and am finding myself missing being closer in.

ATM we are looking at wembley, finchley/barnet and possibly ilford though it puts us much further away from all family. SE london is somewhere I haven't lived but lots of uni friends (childless) live. Just wondered how it works for a family....

OneLittleHopper - A choice of Dunraven - which is going from good to better every year and hugely over-subscribed, the possibility of a Lottery / sports / music scholarship place at Kingsdale, Elmgreen, still proving itself and very popular with children and parents who go there, excellent pastoral provision, the option to try for a selective place at nearby Graveney seems a pretty good rage of secondary options to me! BTG also hugely on the up, and La retraite - for anyone with catholic credentials.

Blu - it's not really a choice if you don't live in the (relatively small) catchment area for Dunraven/Elmgreen, don't really want to rely on DCs getting a scholarship or aren't Catholic! While the fact that both Elmgreen and Dunraven are hugely over-subscribed suggests other non-selective non-faith options are a bit lacking...Realistically, unless you choose your road v carefully, the chances of getting into Dunraven/Elmgreen are fairly limited. Certainly they are where we are!

By contrast we have at least 3 good/outstanding primaries nearby. Hence my conclusion that primary provision is better!

There's a new Academy opening on Christ Church Rd, first intake 2013, which will hopefully ease out the catchments for Dunraven and Elmgreen. I do think there should be a campaign to get Kingsdale to admit on distance - it's madness that academies and free schools are not obliged to take any notice of the spread of local provision. Actually, all the schools across this swathe of S London seem to be popular and very good - Chestnut grove in Balham, the Harris Academies in CP and ED, Charte, acriss to the Sydenham comp (girls),,,but you are right, there are 'black holes'.

The reach for the top band at Dunraven is about a mile - and with BTG improving perhaps more catholic parents will choose that. Not sure if the new Academy will address the overall shortage of places in Lambeth. Evelyn Grace in Brixton is now over-subscribed.