p_in_ed

Just back from my tambourine session at Rye Oak, where I?d slipped a fascinating flyer on the football academy at West Ham United into my man pouch (thinking I could sign my son and heir up for the Claret and Blues in years to come). I strolled through my lilac painted front door and checked out the EDF to discover that AllFor Nun was in right royal form today and was thoroughly venting his spleen. May have to quietly bin the flyer. Think I'll hold onto to my fond recollections of the fence though.

will dex Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Brilliant first post. > > Re the area going down hill I guess that depends > on which way you are looking at LL from. Say if > you look from WR to Barclays, I can see your > point of view, but if you look from EDT to Nero, I > can see the opposite.. Are you sitting at one of the tables outside the EDT Will? Casting your gaze across the road at Cafe Nero? Over that patch of tarmac that was recently dug up? I agree though - a lovely bit of road. I cross it often and feel great affection for it.

Heard Gregg Wallace from Masterchef speaking on Fighting Talk about growing up in Peckham. Does that count? I didn't see him and he wasn't talking about East Dulwich. Hm, on second thoughts maybe I should can this post.

I guess, first mate, it was the triumph of hope over expectation. But I think I agree with you, I?m starting to think it?s a bit unrealistic. Having had a number of conversations over the last year with dog walkers that were perversely walking their dogs in the fenced off ?dog free? area, they?d made it clear to me that they considered the fence to be an infringement of their rights and that expecting them to walk their dogs in a designated part of the park was an unenforceable limitation. I kind of thought that, now they?d achieved what they wanted to achieve, there might be an improvement in picking up. But maybe these weren?t the people that were causing the problem in the first place. Who knows. The behaviour is never observed. It?s never penalised. And as a result there?s little incentive for people to change how they behave. Maybe the fence is neither here nor there when it comes to the behaviour of the minority that fail to clean up after their dogs. But it would be nice to think that something could be done to clean up the Green.

Walking across the Green at lunchtime today, I saw no evidence of a paradigm shift in the behaviour of the irresponsible dog walking minority now that the fence has gone. Without straying from the path or slowing to look carefully, I saw three clear examples of dog fouling. I guess there was a faint hope that now the dog walkers have been given the freedom to roam across the whole Green, we would see a marked improvement in behaviour among the minority that don?t clean up after their dogs. Doesn?t look like it?s going to happen. The number to call to get dog fouling cleaned up is: 020 7525 5777 which is the LBS Noise and Antisocial Behaviour Hotline. They were very helpful

first mate Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I say again though that there is already a decent > enclosed space, especially for small children, > adjacent to the Green. I think it's fine for young > children to kick a ball around,but older kids, or > larger groups should be encouraged to use the Rye. first mate's views on the appropriate use of open space in Southwark are, I imagine, representative of the dog walkers that use Goose Green. The view is that small children should confine themselves to the tarmaced playground over the road (which used to be the site of the local public toilet and the haunt of the areas winos), and that older children should walk up the road to the Rye. Goose Green should be left as the sole preserve of tax paying dog owners. My view is that the local community needs to decide where its priorities lie. Should the needs of children be prioritised, or should the needs of dogs be prioritised. If the outcome of the six month trial is that it is neither practical nor desirable for children and dogs to share the same space for recreation, which group should be catered for on Goose Green? Again, my own view is that children should be given priority, and that it should be the dog owners that are required to make the walk up the road to the Rye. First mate refers to ?infringing the rights of many law abiding, responsible and tax paying dog owners.? I?m not sure tax is the issue. Parents pay tax as well. It was dog walkers with views similar to those of first mate that attended the public meeting on Goose Green on that dark autumnal evening eighteen months ago, when the decision to remove the fence was made. Referring to the article in the Guardian The Mess We're In one solution, widely adopted by councils around the country, is that Dog Control Orders are introduced and that dog walkers are required to exercise their dogs on the streets. I know Mark councils that we shouldn't pre-judge the outcome of the trial, and that there are a number of options available for shared use of the Green, but having seen the Council take eighteen months to get around to removing the fence, I'm sceptical that money will ever be found for any kind of improved fence to go back up at the end of the trial. The dog walkers have effectively reclaimed the whole of Goose Green for their dogs, and it's the children and parents that will have to pace the streets to get their exercise.

Reg Smeeton Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This is a Keynsian idea. 100 men are employed to > take down a fence and then put it back again a few > months later, injecting much needed cash into the > economy via their earnings, and hence ending the > credit crunch. Brilliant thinking. Louisa, you missed Reg's incisive economic analysis earlier in the thread. It's BECAUSE we're heading into a deep dark recession that the council are spending the money. It's Southwark's answer to Obama's economic stimulus package. And there was no need to finesse it through the Council chamber; a small group of crusty old dog walkers got together on the Green one dark autumnal evening eighteen months ago, and all on there own came up with a plan to save the world. The only flaw in Reg's analysis is that the fence won't be going back up. At least not here. It's going straight to a fence loving estate somewhere off Peckham Hill Street.

Mark Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > the main problem is the dog pooh so shall we make > that the common enemy? > Not the fence, not the lack of fence, not the > council, not Southwark Parks I agree Mark, the fence or lack of it is not the problem. But it did seem like a workable solution that allowed both dog walkers and others to use the Green together. The fence has gone though, and I wonder if there is any solution that allows both children and dogs to use the Green in any way that is acceptable to children and parents. I doubt it. Although the significant majority of dog walkers are responsible, those that aren't will always make it untenable that dogs and children should use the same area. I'd like to think there would be a radical change in behaviour among a minority of dog walkers. I'm not holding my breath. In the meantime, the children loose a spring and summer of carefree use of the Green while the experiment is conducted. My own view is that in the absence of a fence, the only practical way forward is to exclude dogs from Goose Green, and require dog walkers to go up the road to Peckham Rye.

A great article in the Guardian today, and perfectly timed with the removal of the fence: The Mess We're In "Over the last 12 months, 50-plus parish, town and district councils have enacted orders denying dogs access to open land - walkies and the attendant business will have to be performed on the town's streets; on a rough and unwelcoming patch of ground on the edge of town; or a car journey away in the countryside." "Quite right too, thinks Claire Gunningham, mother of two children at the school. "I know lots of responsible dog owners, people who pick up every time," she says. "But I'm sorry, it's just not compatible, is it, to have dogs pooing on the ground and then kids coming along and playing on it? It's horrible, absolutely horrible. Really disgusting. And unfair. If it was humans there'd be uproar. Dogs we just let get away with it." Southwark Parks seem to be swimming against the tide in removing the fence and expecting people and dogs to co-exist. The set up we had before, with a fence dividing dog-walking and dog free areas, seemed like a very workable way for both communities to make use of the park. Bring back the fence. The dog walkers will be grateful that they don't live in Geneva, where non-scoopers are fined ?1,700 for the first offence, and then ?8,000 for subsequent offences

A beautiful day. Clear blue skies. A sense of spring in the air. And the Goose Green fence is coming down. Just as we all feel like returning to the Green after a long and muddy winter, the dogs will get there first. The contractors are on-site this morning. The first panel has been removed. The update on the Notice Board says that the reason for the trial period is to look at how the Green is used when there is no dividing fence, and also to see if different users (I guess they mean dogs and people) could use this space compatibly. I can tell them how the Green is used when there is no dividing fence. For most of my time in the area the Green has had no dividing fence. Dogs use the whole Green. And the whole Green becomes squalid and unpleasant. I remember it well. Prior to the dog free area, I would never have dreamt of using the Green for anything other than walking across, as a short cut from one side to the other. It?s been great for the last few years to see it become a genuine community resource, a green space that everyone could enjoy. The notice board promises warden enforcement and fixed penalty notices. Let?s hope this becomes a reality, and that we do see a step change in the behaviour of dogs and dog walkers.

Ted Max Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > There's a long thread just a few down from this > one, with a baddie, a fearless local researcher, > ups and downs and even ... an ending. Fill your > boots. I can feel a docudrama coming on Ted Max

Ah, perceptive Reg. So this will be a great Roosevelt style public work. The Hoover Dam of south London. We could get a modern day Diego Rivera to come and repaint the William Blake mural. And the Goose Green Fence will be visited for generations to come by people who want to see the project that sparked global financial recovery.

Where did you find out nancysmum? Let the "Bring back the Fence" campaign begin. The council have had the whole winter to run their misconceived trial period, and yet nothing was done. And now, just as spring and summer beckon, and the prospect of sitting out and playing on the grass returns, the dogs are given free rein and the park returns to the squalid, unpleasant state it was in before the fence arrived.

Nunhead Girl, have a look at the thread on the Concrete House: Demolition 549 lordship lane (Concrete House) All will be explained

Well done on your coursework results Gen17! Stay on the case though - sounds like it's got a long way to run

Paul Noblet tells me that the minutes of the council meeting won?t be up on the Southwark Council website till later this week, but the report that was agreed on the night can be found here: Council Report on 549 Lordship Lane

The Goose Green Igloo features on BBC Online's Newsbeat: An igloo in London - it's Odd Box It comes in at about 03.20 if you don't want to watch the whole article

This is one of several articles referring to the case: Goldfinger demolisher faces jail I think it's a fair assumption that he was planning the same fate for the Concrete House; that having allowed it to crumble he would at some point have moved in with the bulldozers. I wonder if he owns any other listed buildings for which he plans the same fate, or whether in fact he's already demolished other listed buildings and not been caught. It's shocking that he's demolished a building by Erno Goldfinger, an architect with at least one building owned by the National Trust

Couldn't find the Goose Green Igloo at the Daily Mail link given above, but did find a great photo of the Upland Road Snow Teddy: Upland Road Snow Teddy

Well done Southwark Council and well done Paul Noblet. A really good outome. Might be prudent to write to or send an email of support to Hazel Blears to ensure that the compulsory purchase order is approved. I don't know how compulsory purchase orders work, but I would hope it's a transfer of ownership without any payment to the current owner. And if the new building behind the concrete house has been built without planning permission, perhaps the compulsory purchase order can be extended to that building as well as the plot they both stand on. I like Louisa's idea of setting up a museum. Perhaps the new building could be incorporated into that kind of plan - as admin space or something

There is an article in the online edition of the SLP, reporting that "the council?s executive will meet to consider recommending a compulsory purchase order (CPO) for the Grade II listed property and to allocate up to ?75,000 for the building?s renovation" Concrete House to be saved Great news if the recommendation is approved

I went to see Jo Brand doing her stand-up routine in a room above the Walmer Castle years ago.

I'm surpised that people are having a pop at tomdhu. The case he presents is detailed, informed and articulate. The East Dulwich Forum seems to be a legitimate arena for bringing peoples attention to local issues. I'm sure there are plenty of people that have absolute faith in Thames Water, and have no concerns over the project, but it's perfectly proper for people that do have concerns to raise them here.

Didn't see the flagging up exercise at the weekend, nancysmum. What was it all about and who organised it?

Just sat and watched Antiques Roadshow where an Anthony Gormley maquette for the Angel of the North was valued at a million squid. Highly likely that the cast for the bronze maquette would have been made in what used to be his studio on Bellenden Road. What price now the Gormley bollards along Bellenden Road. A sound investment by the Council. Probably worth slurping some additional concrete around the bases though, before the whole lot disappear.