Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Not helpful to use the T word as you may lose the moral high ground.  Yes, some of the posts are provocative, and perhaps overstep a line.  But they are genuine views 

I have the T word used against me from time to time, so maybe more sensitive than others.

 

I think Angelina's post is spot on:

"To have a proper review, with full intention to follow up on any lessons learned, there should be a full fact find.

This should be accessible to ALL residents (not just those invited) and should embrace other methods than one in-person session (they could send out a survey via Southwark website, or local social media). The council should be involved as well.

There should be a compilation of the main issues raised and importance. 

Follow up should be based on addressing each point. The council should be involved. There should be accountability and a clear way forward, as agreed by all.

So - the gap between what has been set up as a one day by invite meeting, is far, far away from what it should be, if the organisers truly wanted to listen and make improvements.

Perhaps a clue would be that the meeting is set up by the Public Relations team - it's just a tick box. to be seen to be doing the right thing."

  • Agree 2
On 23/07/2024 at 07:50, first mate said:

It would be better to hold a meeting adjacent to the venue, as has been done in the past. Let's not pretend that holding the meeting further away from the venue is not a useful deterrence to attendance.

It's four bus stops away so hardly a deterrent unless one has mobility issues. Gala nor any other events organisers are under obligation to do what they've agreed to do. I'm sure if those who are serious and want to be heard will make the effort to attend the meeting. Whether their concerns have an impact or are taken seriously. Unless you can prove Gala have purposely chosen Peckham Levels as a means to deter people from attending i don't think it helps matters by implying that there's some sort of agenda or conspiracy going on. From following this thread it appears that's it's you with the agenda. Your display of arrogance in the post above ( Let's not pretend ) suggests that we're all in agreement with you.

Surely the simple issue here is (1) Is this just a box ticking exercise - 'we said we'd consult, we have consulted'? or (2) is there any genuine attempt to gain insight so that they could present a 'better' proposal for next year?

I'm a cynic, but I'm guessing that (1) is an odds-on favourite here.

In which case the choice of venue, and indeed the proposed process, is all about ensuring there will be little embarrassment (and nothing to record on surreptitious smartphones) which could be held against them. 

The fact that, apparently, they've invited stakeholders to meet quite far away from the site of the action - which is clearly a disincentive to participate, comes as no surprise. Yes, it's only a few bus stops away but...

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

An interesting series of responses here.  I think they're trying to do the divide thing too, rather than have us all together in one space near to the venue, and away from Peckham Rye Park.  By the way cyclemonkey, regarding postcodes.  Peckham Rye has two postcodes.  Peckham Rye Common is SE15 ie. Peckham postcode.  Peckham Rye Park is SE22 ie. East Dulwich.

But I have an idea.  Why don't we - as many of us who can - all arrive together around 7.30pm?  The email said they'd be taken us one by one to the Auditorium.  Well we can ALL sit in the Auditorium. By definition it is a big space. Let's do that!  I won't be able to get there much before then anyway.  We can demand to all be heard together and we all have the same questions. 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2

Not only that, the location chosen for feedback means they may be more likely to draw in more of those in favour, but who don't necessarily live adjacent to the event. 
 

The event is in the park, not on the common. A feedback location should be much closer to the event site, as it has always been before.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
12 hours ago, first mate said:

Not only that, the location chosen for feedback means they may be more likely to draw in more of those in favour, but who don't necessarily live adjacent to the event. 
 

The event is in the park, not on the common. A feedback location should be much closer to the event site, as it has always been before.

Is the distance/ location going to stop you from going?

 

I really don't think that Gala will have any concerns about a meeting with concerned residents. They're under no obligation to do so. More browning points for them with the council and old bill. There is nothing that can be said that will prevent them from getting a future license for Peckham Rye. As explained previously it takes a lot more than complaints about noise and how the site is left/ reinstated before they get refused a licence. If it was a magnet for violence, open drug dealing and consumption then you might have a chance of getting whatever it is you want.

Edited by Dulwich dweller
spelling correction


It sounds like you think any objection is fruitless - is this because you think the event has full council backing, no matter what? 
 
Your reference to brownie points (at least I think that is what you meant) does make this feedback meeting sound like a tick box exercise, which is really disheartening.

I don't think the three day event will be stopped. My greatest concern is that the event is extended and then a precedent set for yet other festival, large private events to be held.

Edited by first mate
  • Agree 1
7 hours ago, first mate said:

It sounds like you think any objection is fruitless

I have plenty of experience dealing with the council when it comes to events/ licensing and i know what does and doesn't carry weight when voicing concerns. I do think there are valid concerns/ issues but that's me and not the council or how their process works.

 

7 hours ago, first mate said:

is this because you think the event has full council backing, no matter what? 

Mostly so yes and because as i explained i just can't see the council blocking a future application from Gala/ or another similar event unless there's been complete disregard for contractual agreements, safety issues, antisocial behaviour, reports of violence, drug dealing and open consumption plus other criminality that's clearly related to the event. Those are the things that Gala and the council are likely to focus on/point to when on the defensive. I'm not saying don't go and air your views/ concerns but i would keep my expectations low in regard to the  outcome that you're hoping for.

 

7 hours ago, first mate said:

Your reference to brownie points (at least I think that is what you meant) does make this feedback meeting sound like a tick box exercise, which is really disheartening.

It's a PR exercise. They're not obliged to hold a meeting so perhaps not box ticking but their actions will show them in a good light and as being conscientious and caring. It's something that they and the council will no doubt point to if and when the need arises sometime in the future.

 

7 hours ago, first mate said:

I don't think the three day event will be stopped.

I agree with you and for the reasons given above.

 

 

7 hours ago, first mate said:

My greatest concern is that the event is extended and then a precedent set for yet other festival, large private events to be held.

It's possible but from my side of the fence i'd say it's doubtful because of the cost. Presuming the event was extended to two weekends the cost/ rental of the sound system, fencing, floor cover, rigging, lighting, security etc would multiply fourfold. It would be redundant during the week but that won't get you mates rates. They'd have to hike the ticket costs and risk pricing themselves out or range to their target audience. I'd imagine that the profit margins from a site the size of the Rye are not the highest given the running costs that such an event incurs.

 

All the best with your meeting!

Edited by Dulwich dweller
Spelling again.
  • Agree 1

As you know, they have already tried to get the event extended to 6 days and then backed off; my guess is they'll try again next year. 

Catherine Rose seems to have now been replaced as Cabinet Member for Parks, so I don't know if that will affect things. However, she was absolutely set on monetising park land.

As a matter of interest, would you support extension of this event as well as opening up the park for other similar events? 

I do wonder what would happen if it was proposed to rotate the event, so one year it is held in Peckham, the next in Dulwich Park. That way the pain and the pleasure is shared around (transport a barrier to the latter, I guess).

 

Edited by first mate
8 hours ago, first mate said:

As you know, they have already tried to get the event extended to 6 days and then backed off;

I wasn't aware of that. I thought it was being mooted that is all.

 

8 hours ago, first mate said:

As a matter of interest, would you support extension of this event as well as opening up the park for other similar events? 

No. It's common land and shouldn't be used as a business venture.

 

 

  • Agree 1
  • 2 weeks later...

Hello, how many of you went to the drop in meetings at Peckham Levels?  Me and a mate went at 7.30pm.  Three of the production people were there.  They admitted they did not like the tree cutting issue and could not answer to the higher volume this year that appeared to affect so many of us.  I did not believe there were only eight objections! But that didn't include those who complained directly to [email protected]    

They said they had explored the area that day and we had also been and I showed them photos of the large and many areas that still needed to be made good, four months on. They agreed and said they would be doing the 'making good' on that soon.

Anyway, the 3 Gala people said that they had had emails from people who said they could not make the drop in centre days, and so would be arranging for a zoom event with those of you who said they could not attend.

Gala may be an event you think is just to be discussed immediately before and after the event, but plans are started months ahead and post event analyses are worked on long after, as well as these post event meetings.  I told them that whilst they might be nice professional people I wished Gala would never come back for all the bad feeling and disruption it causes in OUR park to our residents.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Thank you for going. I could not attend.

About the tree cutting: was there an explanation as to who had authorised it?

I think a lot of people complained while the event was on. I wonder if those complaints were included? I know of someone who complained at the time and gave contact details. They were not invited to the feedback event at Peckham Levels.

  • Agree 1
  • 5 weeks later...

I was away for the whole of August, so couldn't attend, but have had an email from GALA which I'll be following up on & arranging a zoom call...

"We are proposing afternoon meetings between September 16th and September 24th for a zoom call.

If you would like to schedule this, please respond with your preferred date and time within this period. We will do our best to arrange a meeting that fits your timetable.

I have also attached the bird nesting report, which we can discuss with you alongside the biodiversity fund in the call.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Best regards,

GALA"

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

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

    • A Google search brought up eleven Chango  branches, although they don't all seem to be listed on their website. In the order they came up: East Dulwich, Clapham Common, Mayfair, Wandsworth, City of London, Wimbledon,  Parsons Green, Kensington, Highgate, Richmond, Hampstead. I think it is the positioning of this new branch that has mostly got to me. I accept that they would have to go for where a space became vacant, but Lordship Lane is pretty long, even just the part with shops in,  and choosing to  open a stone's throw away from Chacarero seems mean, to say the least. I wonder if they have made contact with Chacarero. It would be nice to think they had (in a friendly way, obviously!) As regards the apparently  marketing spiel, at least one of the online reviewers also refers to a Chango branch (the Parsons Green one in this case) as a "gem". Probably just coincidence and a word in common use to describe such places. I wouldn't know. I'm ancient 🤣
    • I like empanadas. I don't think Chango is a massive chain - it's got a few stores all in London I believe (stand to be corrected if I've got that wrong). I don't see a problem with them opening on the Lane personally. I really like Chacarero, but that doesn't mean that they should be immune from competition - if they're successful and open a couple more stores, are we then meant to stop supporting them for being a 'chain'?  That opening post does sound a lot like marketing spiel though. Is the OP perhaps connected to the new business I wonder?
    • According to what I can see online, Dynamic Vines and Cave de Bruno sell totally different kinds of wine to each other.  Dynamic Vines  "work with independent winemakers who produce outstanding wine using sustainable practices in the vineyard and minimal intervention in the cellar".  Cave de Bruno specialises in French wines and spirits from small independent producers. So two different USPs, and no doubt two different but overlapping customer bases who can afford these wines. Probably different again to the people mainly  shopping for wine at Majestic or the Co op. On the other hand, the two empanada shops appear on the face of it to be selling virtually identical products. But time will tell, won't it? Let's see how they are both doing in - say - a couple of years' time. Impossible, of course, to compare that with how they would have done if there had been only one of them. I just feel more  sorry for the original one than for  the one which can apparently already afford to have a number of shops in places like Mayfair and Highgate. I'm tempted to buy something there every week, and I don't even like that kind of pastry 🤣
    • Not only can he turn olive oil into Vermouth, but also water into a wine. A true miracle worker.  I wouldn't say a wine shop sells a wide variety of things - and there are two right next to each other.  And once upon a time, upmarket pizza shops were very specific. So were burritos etc. These Argentinian cornish pasties are clearly becoming mainstream; we should consider ourselves lucky to be witnessing this exciting upward trend within our lifetimes and on OUR HIGH STREET. We can tell our grandkids that we remember when there was no internet and no empanadas.  I'm sure that if the family empanada people have a good business head, they'll be able to ride this wave of competition, just like Bruno has. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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