BrandNewGuy

Berocca, Nurofen and fresh air.

It's very little public amenity space, really. And the most important point to bear in mind that all of Green Dale fields (including the astroturf pitch) are Metropolitan Open Land, which is a planning designation as strong as that of Green Belt. To allow the building of a stadium where there is current an astroturf pitch would be a hugely dangerous precedent to set for the future of MOL all over London. And Green Dale is loved by many local people, even this corner :-) In fact, at the exhibition, a small lad asked the property guy standing next to the model what the stadium was. The guy told him and the lad said, "That's rubbish! Where are we going to have a kick around?" A valid point, given that the public availability of the proposed five-a-side pitch will be constrained, from what we were told, by booking it and paying for it. So that's a loss of local public amenity, never mind the open space which would be lost for good on Green Dale.

taper Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Is there any assessment on how much land will be > brought into public use from the current football > pitch? This snap of the exhibition model shows very little. The proposed stadium is on the left and the flats on the right, with "Football Club Square" and the five-a-side pitch (which will not be free to use, apparently) in the middle.

Yes, there were a series of leaks around the junction towards the end of last week that appeared to be getting worse, so I suspect it's emergency work by TW.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Jah Lush Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Jeremy Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > > It is a shit sign. But those beer prices are > > > alright. ?4.60 for a pint of Lagunitas is > pretty > > > good - in fact looks like a typo.. > > It's an imported IPA... so under a fiver is fairly > cheap. I wonder if Heineken taking a 50% stake has something to do with that ? buttering us up with the price and then brewing it under licence in Europe. When the Flying Pig started having Lagunitas on draft all the time, I wondered if something was up. http://www.forbes.com/sites/briansolomon/2015/09/08/heineken-grabs-50-of-lagunitas-brewery-to-take-ipas-global/#58c709ae3e2c

If you've been round Green Dale recently, you'll see that there's almost no litter or dog muck. Tidying the place up has done wonders for it and the changes have been welcomed by locals. I know of many dog-walkers who love Green Dale, as well as locals who prefer the calm of Green Dale to a park. And it is used among others by Mother Goose nursery for picnics as well as Newlands Academy (for excluded pupils), who love the open space. There is unique ecology at Green Dale ? more than 40 species of birds have been seen there in the last couple of years and the last survey revealed more than 60 different trees, grasses and flowers. In fact, Southwark Council are in the process of declaring Green Dale to be a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) as they agree with their own ecology report and that of the London Wildlife Trust that it is a valuable space ? for wildlife and people. Yes, accessibility can be improved and minimal management introduced for the trees and grassland. Please pay a visit and see for yourself. The future of Green Dale and the future of DHFC are not a zero-sum game. I fear the possibility that the developer might use a 'divide and rule' approach, when other plans are possible and can satisfy all parties.

It's a shame that the full plans couldn't have been revealed before the spin started, but just to respond to a few points from that article: "... an unusual 3G pitch". Well, there are 570 approved 3G pitches in England, so perhaps not that unusual. "The proposed new stadium will be located slightly to the west of the current ground on a training pitch bordering, though not impeding on, the Greendale Fields." It's not a training pitch but a poorly maintained astroturf pitch. And it would be impossible for a stadium not to impede on the Metropolitan Open Land of Green Dale because the space between the astroturf and the current stadium boundary is Metropolitan Open Land. What's more, earlier stadium plans showed a certain amount of extra encroachment, but we won't know until the exhibition opens. "A ?linear park? is also being proposed, which would create a green path from the stadium to East Dulwich Stadium." I presume that's meant to be "East Dulwich Station". "The under-used Greendale Fields will also be revitalised as part of the project, with Southwark Council and the club?s owners Hadley Property Group working together to reclaim the site. Paths, picnic areas, play zones, meadows, woodlands and a pond will be created or restored, according to the council?s latest proposals outlined in its planning documents." There is no evidence given that Green Dale is ?under-used?. It's a well-loved oasis of peace and greenery and as such does not need ?reclaiming? and its unique ecology and unspoilt nature would be harmed by it being turned into a park. Accessibility could be improved, but that's a far cry from what seems to be suggested. "Matt Rimmer, from Hadley Property Group, said: ?Dulwich Hamlet has been at Champion Hill for over a century. We are committed to securing a sustainable base for DHFC, to ensure that the club can remain at Champion Hill for the next 100 years and beyond."" As I've mentioned before, if DHFC have the good fortune to be promoted twice, they'll not be able to go any higher, as currently 3G pitches are not permitted by the Football League. Moreover, under the previously aired plans, the stadium's capacity would likewise not be sufficient for League football, but until we see the designs in detail, who knows...?

And I believe tickets are only valid for the day they're bought.

Just a reminder that the exhibition is open today (4pm ? 8pm) and Saturday (11am ? 2pm). I'll try to find out what material is going to be online and post links here ? or take photos and post them up for those people who can't make it along.

But you don't deny that others park there in order to pick up? And as it's a private road, they could, if they wanted, insist on no parking or dropping off for anyone unless by agreement, which is presumably what they have with the tyre place and the builders' yard. Yeah, that might be a pain and seem unreasonable, but it's their call not yours.

That's the whole point about permissions on a private road. It's arbitrary. And if the owners put up a sign saying 'No parking', then don't park there.

Southwark's report of the Grove Vale CPZ consultation from four years ago states that Railway Rise is not a public highway: http://moderngov.southwarksites.com/mgConvert2PDF.aspx?ID=25008 [page 40] And the woman from the cottages doesn't need to be 'enforcing' anything to tell people not to park there. Her manner might have been off, but it seems to me she's entitled to reiterate what the owners have painted up all along the hoardings on the other side of the road.

richard tudor Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If the resident asked Cllr Barber for a barrier he > would jump at the chance to organise a > consultation to arrange. > > Mention CPZ and possible cycle route done and > dusted > > It's a non important road. It's a private road, so it's neither important nor non-important.

Did you pour yourself a pint in the manner of Michael Elphick in "Withnail and I"?

Blimey, what have you been smoking? ;-) I'm 'in', but very very critical of the whole EU mess. In fact, Cameron's (admittedly token) concession that 'ever closer political union' does not apply to the UK is good news. I detest most of the main voices on both sides of the debate, so I'll do my best to ignore the whole shebang for the next four months. Four months! Christ...

spider69 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > When the garden centre was there people parked > there all the time with no problem for a short > period > > Why has this suddenly become a problem for her. It's a private road, so people can use it if those whose road it is give their permission ? which they can withdraw whenever they wish.

Agreed. I was just pointing out that everyone's 100 or so trees in the end do matter.

PK36 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Thanks for your reply BrandNewGuy - interesting to > hear from someone who has a better understanding > of the Green Dale site. I've only ever used it as > a cut through and always thought it looked pretty > unloved and was mainly used by dog walkers. Do you > have any idea of the number of people who > regularly use Green Dale and for what purpose/s? Since Freinds of Green Dale was set up two years ago, we've been amazed how many local people have come forawrd and said how much they love the peace and quiet of Green Dale. Lots of dog walkers, but also people who simply appreciate its peace and quiet ? not something you always get in a park. There are also people using it as a cut-through, children exploring (Mother Goose nursery use it for adventure picnics) and birdwatchers watching birds. Here's a little film we made: > Regarding Point 2 - I'm not sure of the history of > the site, but I presume the area where the > artificial pitches are now must have only been > designated as MOL after the pitches were built, as > otherwise the fact they were built in the first > place would seem to go against the > rules/guidelines for MOL. I'm not sure of the history of the designation with reference to the creation of the artificial pitch, but it may well be that proper permission wasn't sought. > Regarding Point 3 - it seems strange that > Southwark Council are planning to declare Green > Dale as a Site of Importance to Nature > Conservation with reference to it's 'wild' nature, > when their own plans include the creation of a > playground, picnic area, pond and also involve the > removal of some of the dense scrub in the > southwest part. Watch this space :-) Southwark are yet to finalise any plans for the site, but in conversation with Friends of Green Dale, they accept many of our points about the lack of 'development' being a positive thing for the site, given the amount of play space available locally. Personally, I think Green Dale's unique character as a wild space is something Southwark can be positive about in terms of allowing access to wildlife and so on. > Regarding the ground not being 'sustainable' due > to the possibility of promotion to the football > league, I like your positivity, but I think any > chance of that is a long, long way off, especially > as we are now into the customary Hamlet late > season wobble! Haha! Yeah, I'm being rosy-tinted ;-) > I too, look forward to checking out the latest > plans and hopefully a solution that suits (almost) > everyone can be found. Agreed.

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Cant see the connection. LSD lasts for 6-8 > hours.. > With a meal I'm in and out in 45mins... with the > exception of Curry Club lasting a couple of hours > but that is generally waiting time.. > > Foxy Curry Club or acid? Either way, it's a trip, man... ;-)

Loz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Climate change? Although 'every little helps', I > doubt 100 or so trees will make a difference in > the grand scheme of things. Though even this > would be offset anyway if more were planted (as is > promised), as growing trees take up more CO2 than > mature ones. The offsetting issue is actually the key point. Attitudes such as "I doubt 100 or so trees will make a difference in the grand scheme of things" have allowed for piecemeal deterioration of our urban and rural environment in all sorts of ways. Small changes in each of our lives can mean big changes for everyone's lives ? for good or ill.

Oh, one further point. The current plans might not produce a 'sustainable' stadium for DHFC. Should the club have the good fortune to get promoted into the League (a less distant hope than it has been in the past!), the capacity is insufficient for Football League purposes. What then? More encroachment onto MOL?

I'm less certain of the plans as I'm both a long-time DHFC supporter and an active member of the Friends of Green Dale. I don't want to say too much now as no-one's yet seen the latest proposals, but here are my own personal responses to a few of PK36's comments above (the Friends of Green Dale will consult its members in detail once Hadley's plans have been seen and digested ? as will the Dulwich Hamlet Supporters Trust, of which I'm also a member). 1. The current(poorly maintained) artificial pitch is indeed on Metropolitan Open Land ? as are the grass, trees and scrub that surround it. So it would be impossible to build a stadium on the current pitch without swallowing up at least some MOL. 2. The MOL designation is the urban equivalent of green belt and as such any development already in place (in this case the artificial pitch) can only be developed or altered so as to have the same or less impact on the surrounding land. So, for instance, if there is an old pavilion on an area of MOL, you can refurbish or rebuild it. What you can't do is use its footprint to build something substantially bigger and/or different. 3. 'Parkland' in itself cannot make up for the loss of MOL. Moreover, Southwark Council are currently in the process of declaring Green Dale a Site of Importance to Nature Conservation, with particular reference to the fact that it is relatively 'wild' and has not been trimmned, planted or cut. As such it maintains a unique mix of flora and fauna (as well as plenty of dog walkers!) that simply isn't there in a 'park' environment. 4. Although I welcome any developer or council interest in keeping Green Dale an oasis of green tranquillity for people and wildlife, I'm very wary (mainly because of the unique habitat) in seeing too much well-intentioned intervention, so the cost of keeping Green Dale a valuable part of our local environment woould be (and is) relatively cheap compared to parks and other maintained open spaces. I'm looking forward to seeing Hadley's proposals and I hope we can all have a respectful debate as to the future of the football club, Green Dale fields and the local area. I'd urge everyone to look at what is proposed and make your views known.

http://www.everyoneactive.com/about-us/ "Sports and Leisure Management (SLM Ltd.) was established in 1987 and is the longest established leisure contractor in the UK. SLM Ltd?s consumer brand is Everyone Active, which is the name that can be seen at 117 leisure and cultural facilities across the UK. We successfully manage these facilities in partnership with 36 different local authorities. Our centres stretch from the north in Sunderland to Mid Suffolk in the east, Fareham in the south and Plymouth in the south west. Our brand, mission and values We?re called Everyone Active for a reason ? we have built a strong reputation for delivering well-managed leisure facilities, which have successfully proven to encourage everyone to be more active. Whether it?s the most state-of-the-art gym equipment, sports facilities, ASA accredited swim programmes or fun activities for children; we have something for the entire community to enjoy. We?re enthusiastic about being active and staying healthy and we want you to be too. We?ve made it our mission to encourage more people to participate in 30 minutes of moderate physical activity, five times a week, either in-centre or online."

I didn't say charging was a savage cut. I meant that those who defend any and every action of the council with a kneejerk "It's the cuts" response shut down any possible argument that the council might be sometimes cocking things up thmeselves. And don't lay that guilt trip on me, man.

Once again the campaign is using the misleading phrase "Grade 1 SINC woods". The entire site is a "Site of Borough Importance for Nature Conservation (Grade I)" and according to the council is a SINC because its importance comes mostly from its location and extent as an area of semi natural open space within an otherwise built up residential area. There is nothing specific about the ?woods? in any of this.