Jump to content

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, RichH said:

We had a leaflet dropped through our door in relation to this a few weeks ago. Assume the profits from Gala helped make this happen.

I really hope this doesn't lead to parts of the park being permanently waterlogged, as it did when they undertook similar work in Dulwich park. This quote (below), doesn't fill me with confidence....

Quote

capturing about 6 Olympic-sized swimming pools worth of surface water and releasing it very slowly

The cynic in me wonders whether this is a a case of an under investment in our infrastructure / drainage and sewage systems by private companies, externalising the costs of mitigation to councils (and to the detriment of our open spaces).

Edited by Earl Aelfheah
  • Like 2

Hi, I am one of the Peckham Rye Ward Councillors. To confirm that these are flood alleviation works. These are to bring improvements to the park and common and to reduce the risk of flooding by ground water to nearby residential properties. More information is included in the link.

Information Boards.pdf

  • Thanks 1

Southwark did some good work maybe ten years ago improving the drainage on the football pitch to the left as you look towards central London.  Both the Rye and Dulwich Park would be standing water for several weeks around the football training areas in late winter, geology and precipitation rather than any incompetence. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Not suggesting any incompetence. But reading the info, it suggests that the bunds are being put in place to hold water in the park:

“capturing about 6 Olympic-sized swimming pools worth of surface water and releasing it very slowly”.

…so I’m interested whether this will lead to the park being more regularly waterlogged.

I would have thought that the responsibility for drainage / flood avoidance is a joint one with the private companies who run this infrastructure, alongside the local authority, but may be wrong. Again it would be interesting to know the answer.

Edited by Earl Aelfheah
  • 1 month later...
On 19/07/2024 at 09:09, tercio said:

My understanding is that they are capturing the water under the surface and then releasing it. The commons should be less wet on the surface as a result. 

They are doing that and perhaps it will have that result, but the intended result is actually to reduce flooding in surrounding streets not on the common itself.

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

    • I'm a bit of an architecture geek and I must confess I find it one of the most gimmicky ugly redesigns I've seen in a while. I'm always open to quirky but this is just not nice in any way shape or form.
    • "A user named Daniel added: "Give your staff time off you ghouls." Surrey business hopscotchshoeboutique chimed in with: "I really think for one day of the year the staff should have a day off."" https://uk.news.yahoo.com/gails-bakery-reveals-controversial-christmas-135155096.html
    • Another recommendation for Niko. Great communication, top guy, and super reliable and skilled - all at a fair price. Takes a lot of care in what he does and talks you through everything. 
    • Some foxes are very tame. The foxes that live near the electricity sub-station thing on the corner of Calton and Woodwarde will happily walk up to you/passed you. They are some of the best looking foxes around so clearly being well-fed - glorious coats and bushy tails but interested in humans and keen to engage/be fed rather than being scared.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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