Jump to content

Recommended Posts

*edit: doesn't seem all that bad, and there are plenty of links provided below to ongoing debates and consultations. plus it lokos rather nice*


It seems Lambeth council want to bulldoze 1000 sq m of Brockwell Park to shove a road through it. There's a very short consultation period which has passed with almost no effort on the council's part.


These chaps know more about it than me, but surely bulldozing london parks is meant to be anathema, I'm a little shocked by this

http://www.brockwellpark.com/


This shows the area, which while not that dramatic, I can't help but think it's not only the thin end of the wedge, but indicative of a certain contempt of the residents by lambeth council.


Do lounge if too far down the road.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/1801-brockwell-park-road-clearance/
Share on other sites

Not yet looked at the detail but that road is a bugger to drive through at any time of the day - a serious bottle neck if ever there was one! Five roads into one just don't go. I love Brockwell Park but provided they take a small pinch I won't be upset - it's twice as big as Dulwich Park.

Yeah, I've changed my mind since the email I was sent that alerted me to this 'travesty'. That area is basically a toilet for the carlsberg special brew brigade at the moment as well as something of a deathtrap.

I may have to retract my "appalled from ambridge" post :-$

There's rather more about it here: Herne Hill Society


There has also been much discussion about it here: Herne Hill Forum


This matter has been under discussion for a long time in the Herne Hill area. The plans are supported by each of the four political parties that are represented on Lambeth and Southwark Councils.


Tessa Jowell MP

I've read a bit more and I am wholeheartedly in support. Herne Hill central is a lovely area but it needs to be less boxed in and congested. This proposal will allow for wider pavements, part paved areas (far safer for all the children and families who go there) and will be far more attractive for investment. Being the closest area to W Dulwich I fully support this. The organisation dead set against this has before and after shots of the boundary = http://www.brockwellpark.com/herne_hill_junction.htm


The park is 128.5 acres = 500,000 square metres. They propose to remove 1,000. 1/500th is 0.2% absolutely infintesimal.


Obviously this should not set a precedent for encroachment but there is a real need to improve this bottle neck.

Amazing! Lambeth Council are actually encouraging traffic into the area, rather than what appears to be a national pastime of discouraging it! I wonder how many of those for this proposed land grab, would happily give up a percentage of their own front gardens to widen their roads and thus allow a better traffic flow. The demands on open/green spaces in London are at a premium and I don't think we can afford to lose any!

I think you're being somewhat naieve. Do you live in SE24/SE21 or SE27? If you did you would know that there is a clear need for this. As I mentioned this is 0.2% of the park's space. The parcel of land in question currently houses a set of dire toilets and is a meeting point for the local drunks. As a regular user of this park I am for it.


What they plan to do to Crystal Palace - now that's another story entirely.

I think it's an excellent idea and I'm all for it. The traffic flow around that part of Herne Hill has been bloody awful for decades. It's not like you will be losing much of the park anyway, just a bit of a snip around the main front gates and the old toilets.

I thought I never say this but I agree with Maurice.


Whilst I'm sure the people on that website do a great job in terms of the park and I totally applaud people who give up their free time for such causes, you've got to pick and chose your battles carefully so as not to undermine your credibility for the important issues.


That corner of BP is grotty and this looks alright. If anything, it might make the park more attractive; less congestion and a tidier exterior.

A 'travesty' it is not, as for 'driv(ing) a road across the the park', they seem not to know what across means.

I'm wondering if the Friends of Brockwell Park is a front for the drunks who are the only people who use that patch of the park.


Oh, and I think it's a great idea.


(edited to include a positive)

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Gold men’s wedding band and signet ring suspected to have come off outside of William Rose, Moxons or Bora on Lordship Lane on Friday 9th January during the day. Please get in touch if found. Reward if returned!
    • Hello,  I am interested to know people's opinion regarding dogs left tied up outside shops.  As I am hoping most dog owners are aware of how high risk it is now for dog theft.  People's houses are targeted for dog theft, even waiting to have a dog out in their back gardens, even for few minutes, to steal.  This is a very common occurrence now, as is breaking into properties to steal dogs.  The reasons behind dog theft varies, from using to breed, sell on, to use to sit whilst asking for money, (obviously not all people asking for money are dog thieves & may well own their own dog) and for dog bait for fighting.  This is not me being a drama queen, it is there for anyone to research regarding dog theft.  So would you leave your dog tied up outside a shop? 
    • I don't know if any of the cricket or tennis clubs also have little gyms. There are also pilates studios on Melbourne Grove, Blackwater St, North Cross Rd and even the community hall of the church on Calton Ave. The David Lloyd gym in Orpington is very luxurious and expensive.  
    • HI CPR Dave, I have to agree with Dogkennelhillbilly. We still have net migration into the country as per the Office of National Statistics- https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/internationalmigration It may go negative in a year or two if pundits specialising in this are correct, but it isn't yet. Hi Dogkennelhillbilly, I don't think your maths is correct. Southwark Council states total empty homes at 8,588 -https://southwarknews.co.uk/news/housing/southwark-has-over-8500-empty-homes/ the total number of homes is 135k. Which means 6.36% are empty. However, while canvassing came across an empty home which does not appear to have been appreciated by Southwark Council who are now investigating whether the empty Home Council Tax Premium should have been applied for the last 10+ years. It seems likely the 8,588 is under reporting the number of empty homes.  Infill sites are defined by most public bodies was non strategic sites from a development perspective. The railway yard and other sites are in the Southwark strategic plans and thus would not be infill sites.  Tall buildings planted into lower surrounding suburban areas is a subjective matter whether they are viewed as out of character for the area. It is factually true that I think they are out of character. Equally you have no qualms about such tall buildings being planted into the SE22 area. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...