CPCA Newsletter Spring 2009

Crystal Palace Community Association

CPCA

NEWSLETTER Spring 2009

Registered Charity No. 261790

Free to members - £2 where sold

BETRAYAL

BY BORIS In an act of betrayal, the London Mayor has approved private housing development on public Metropolitan Open Land and Conservation Area at Crystal Palace Park, threatening other parks and green open spaces throughout the UK. The Mayor has betrayed his pre-election pledge to “protect London’s green and open spaces” and his assurance that he did “...not feel the building of houses on this precious parkland is a suitable way forward.”

Giles Dolphin, Head of Planning Decisions at City Hall, wrote in a letter to Bromley Council supporting the London Development Agency planning application for Crystal Palace Park: “The Mayor has concluded that … the inappropriate residential development is justified by the unique and exceptional characteristics of this park which have led to the urgent need for the improvements (which themselves have widespread public support).”

Bromley’s disregard for environmental concerns in approving luxury housing development on a public park as part of a funding strategy can now be repeated by other councils.

Instead of presumption against such blatant misuse of public open space, it can now, seemingly, be endorsed on the spurious justification of ‘regeneration’, enabling opportunistic developers to profit from what is no more than public-asset stripping.

“I regard the LDA’s proposal as crass, unnecessary and provocative. ... including housing proposals in Crystal Palace Park is unacceptable.”

The Rt Hon Lord Warner of Brockley

GOVERNMENT CALLS IN LDA PARK MASTERPLAN FOR LOCAL PUBLIC INQUIRY Following approval by the London Borough of Bromley on 9 December 2008 of the Mayor’s London Development Agency Crystal Palace Park ‘Masterplan’ application, the CPCA and others lobbied the Government Office for London to call in the application for public inquiry.

As the application includes sale of Metropolitan Open Land and protected parkland, it conflicts with Bromley’s planning policy and the Mayor’s ‘London Plan’. As such it is known as a Departure Application and was automatically referred to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government for consideration for public inquiry.

Call-in applies when an application: • proposes the building of 150 houses or more, • is on land owned by a local authority, • conflicts with UDP policies, • develops housing on any greenfield site of five hectares or more, • involves building housing at a density of 30 dwellings per hectare or less, • raises significant effects beyond the immediate locality, • has serious urban design issues, and/or • gives rise to substantial regional controversy.

All these criteria apply to the LDA Park Masterplan application.

Page 2

The decision to call in the application for local public inquiry was received by Bromley Council on 28 January 2009. The Government Office for London (GOL) advised Bromley: “The Secretary of State is of the opinion that this application is one that she ought to decide herself because she considers that the proposal may conflict with national and regional policies on important matters.”

The CPCA is encouraged that the Secretary of State has called in the application, recognising the contentiousness of proposals for park improvements which include the sale of public assets for private profit. LDA claim that such a strategy for park improvements is justified by ‘very special circumstances’ is flawed.

Sale of parkland for housing is widely opposed by the public and all four neighbouring boroughs who recognise the precedent this would set.

The Rt Hon Lord Warner of Brockley said: “I regard the LDA’s proposal as crass, unnecessary and provocative … including housing proposals in Crystal Palace Park is unacceptable.”

A £67.5 million Crystal Palace Park Masterplan over 20-30 years is not demonstration of ‘very special circumstances’ necessary to allow building on MOL.

“... the proposal may conflict with national and regional policies on important matters.”

Hazel Blears, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

The date and venue of the local public inquiry by a Government appointed Inspector, and which will enable proper scrutiny to be applied, has yet to be announced.

The final decision will be made by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Hazel Blears.

The CPCA’s letter to GOL requesting call-in can be found on our website: www.cpca.org.uk

CPCA TO PARTICIPATE IN THE INQUIRY The CPCA has been allowed ‘Rule 6’ status by the Planning Inspectorate at the forthcoming local Public Inquiry into the LDA Crystal Palace Park Masterplan applications.

Under ‘Rule 6’ the CPCA will be able to participate in the Inquiry and have the opportunity to question Bromley, the LDA (the developer), witnesses and others, and to test evidence.

The CPCA has prepared a ‘statement of case’ and written ‘proofs of evidence’.

A public inquiry is an adversarial forum similar to a court of law. The public can attend as observers, although this will not affect the inquiry’s outcome, as the Inspector can only consider statements and written evidence.

HYPOCRISY ...

O N A M O N U M E N TA L S C A L E The latest grand announcement from City Hall, nine months after the ‘Priority Parks’ scheme was unveiled by Mayor Johnson, is the ‘Great Spaces’ initiative. The Mayor’s press release of 10 March 2009 states: “The aim is to help transform some of the city’s ... streets, squares, parks and riverside walks into places Londoners and visitors will want to use and enjoy all year round.”

The Mayor said he was determined to improve “…our quality of life and

environment and it is the capital’s public spaces that make London such a wonderful, engaging city and help attract millions of visitors every year.” Most would agree with this sentiment.

However, in an unfortunate turn of phrase considering what he has approved for Crystal Palace Park, he said: “This scheme is about building on what is already good and encouraging new ideas to create even more great spaces across the city for everyone to enjoy.”

The Mayor was right when he said of the Priority Parks scheme that: “Often simple improvements,

such as more bins, more entrances, increased lighting and litterbins, can help local people re-claim their local parks and gardens.”

However, his consultants don’t earn huge fees by keeping things simple, as demonstrated by the £67.5 million price tag on Crystal Palace Park improvements.

Can the public expect a future press release announcing that the sale of the century has begun, or are meaningless gestures by the Mayor and his consultants intended to hide from the public what is really happening to public parks and open spaces?

THE SALE OF OUR HERITAGE HAS BEGUN Richard Rogers, Deputy Chair of the Mayor's ‘Great Spaces’ panel said: "I believe that access to open space should be a public right.

Everyone should be able to see a tree from their window, sit on a bench close to their home, or sit on the grass in the park.” He might have added that the luxury apartments proposed for prime parkland locations will provide just that, for the privileged few.

The 180 apartments to be built in Crystal Palace Park are likely to fetch more than £ 1/2 million each, even in the current economic climate, and could produce about £40-50 million profit for the developers. It is claimed that the Park will benefit by an estimated

The 180 apartments in Crystal Palace Park are likely to fetch more than £1/2 million each, even in the current economic climate, and could produce about £40-50 million profit for the developers.

The public would receive nothing from this.

There have been several cases where the Mayor has chosen not to direct refusal of planning applications which do not conform to policies of the London Plan.

£12 million from the sale of the land to the developers, which would perhaps fund no more than the restoration of the terraces.

The Mayor’s Annual Monitoring Report, February 2009, confirms serious loss of open space from development in London totalling almost 100 ha.(247 acres).

So it seems that not all Ken’s proposals have found disfavour with Boris. What Mayor Livingstone, another ‘false friend’ of green and open spaces (preelection), started, so Mayor Johnson continues.

Surely, if a body within the GLA is making a development proposal, there should be independent analysis of it. This only seems possible at present via Government Office for London, a body which is itself under threat.

In addition, designated Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation have been allowed to be reduced by 18 ha.(45 acres).

“This scheme is about building on what is already good” Mayor Boris Johnson

Page 3

BROMLEY DCC HEARING On 9 December 2008, Bromley Development Control Committee considered the London Development Agency Masterplan outline application for Crystal Palace Park. The Council Chamber was packed to capacity, with some members of the public having to be seated on the floor of the chamber and in an adjoining room with audio-link.

There were nine objectors to the planning application: Alastair Cameron of the Joseph Paxton Society, Ken Lewington of the Crystal Palace Foundation, Jason Cunningham of Natural England, Rosanna Cavallo of West Beckenham Residents’ Association, Steve Sawko of Ledrington Road Green residents, Tony Barnett of The Caravan Club, Joseph Mullen local resident, Jon Digby-Rogers and John Payne of the CPCA. John Payne urged members of the committee to abandon party politics, respect the concerns of their constituents who oppose housing, refuse this application, and insist that the LDA return with a more moderate and sustainable scheme that does not rely upon, as a funding strategy, the sale of protected parkland for commercial development. He reminded them that Bromley DCC members had previously expressed strong concerns on the housing proposals where Cllr Adams said "we shouldn’t be selling parkland for housing… it really is a dangerous precedent".

Bromley Planning Department records confirm overwhelming public opposition to housing in the Park, as does the LDA's own stakeholder consultation, the 85% opposition to housing in a newspaper poll, the 7,000 signature petition to the London Mayor and all four neighbouring boroughs who oppose the sale of public parkland for private housing.

Page 4

John Payne said that in an attempt to stifle near unanimous public opposition, the LDA retained public relations consultants 'dialogue' whose cynical remit was given on their website as: "to maximise support for the scheme and to minimise opposition.”

He said to allow housing on MOL the LDA must demonstrate 'very special circumstances' which, in the view of the CPCA, they have failed to do. Falsely and misleadingly, the LDA claim that publicly accessible parkland will be increased. The Park is defined as that land within its boundaries, the nature and use of which can change at any time.

Construction of eight, four and five-storey blocks of luxury flats will be irrecoverable loss of precious public parkland.

“the outline application is going to take years, if not decades, to deliver… we need to make sure that what we don’t get is two new sites of blocks of flats, one new college and the rest cancelled because of budget cuts.”

Cllr Tom Papworth, Crystal Palace Ward Nicholas Pearson Associates were commissioned by Bromley to review the LDA’s Environmental Statement. They identify the unsubstantiated statements and highlight 44 issues that require clarification from the LDA before a decision can be made. Pearson Associates warn that if the Environmental Statement does not include the full environmental information required, any planning permission granted runs the risk of being quashed. They quote case law supporting this.

Alastair Cameron said: "If we allow building on the site of the old

Palace we would be destroying one of the most significant Victorian sites in the country and destroying the valuable archaeology of our heritage."

Steve Sawko made a powerful case on behalf of local residents who were "…completely against the proposed destruction of Ledrington Road Green, directly behind residents' houses and within the conservation area. ...The LDA wants to build accommodation for Capel Manor students there, which would be a completely unwanted and unnecessary building.”

Jon Digby-Rogers, a banker specialising in project financing said “The costing estimate of £67 million does not include professional fees or VAT. When everything is added up it will be well in excess of £110 million”. Mr Digby-Rogers warned “If permission is given for this to proceed and the LDA walks away if it cannot find the money, what's to stop a private investor buying them out and we get the luxury flats, but none of the other improvements?"

Jason Cunningham said: "There are eight types of rare bat species in Crystal Palace Park. The LDA plans to fell 473 trees to make way for new building and land clearance. If these trees are cut down, bats will be forced out of the dark and their natural habitat."

TREE SURVEY RESULTS MANIPULATED Ken Lewington made objection on behalf of the Crystal Palace Foundation. He was concerned that any proposed museum would not be open for many years, removal of retaining walls and trees and tons of soil might change the configuration of the landscape resulting in increased volumes of surface water ending up in Ledrington Road and that tons of spoil might be used to place round the National Sports Centre, in detriment to the appearance of this listed building.

He calculated, from the applicant’s

own tree survey, that of the 470 trees proposed for removal, 387 of them cannot be diseased or represent a health and safety risk because each one falls within one of the categories under which a tree should or could be retained.

Following exposure of this blatant contradiction, perhaps not only the Environmental Statement but all statistics given within the LDA application should now receive further close scrutiny.

Supporting the application, Mark Lloyd LDA, Robin Buckle LDA, Madeleine Hall Capel Manor College and local resident Adam Harman spoke on behalf of the application. Ray Sacks of the Crystal Palace Campaign, supported the application and the housing proposals, which is surprising, as the CPC opposed successfully, from 1997-2001, commercial development in Crystal Palace Park under the emotive slogan ‘Save Our Park’.

Cllr Tom Papworth, although not a member of the DCC, spoke passionately as the Crystal Palace ward member. He began by asking quite how Bromley allowed the Park to become neglected. He welcomed much of the LDA proposals, but raised concerns on the housing on MOL, the Capel Manor ‘Lodge’ on Ledrington Road Green and the phasing of the Masterplan works.

He said that erecting a 15m high, 14,000 cubic metre building on the patch of green behind the homes of residents of Anerley Hill “is going to be massively deleterious to their quality of life”. He questioned why this building needed to be located on that area of parkland.

With reference to phasing, he was concerned that “the outline application is going to take years, if not decades, to deliver… we need to make sure that what we don’t get is two new sites of blocks of flats, one new college and the rest cancelled because of budget cuts”. He recommended the committee defer their decision and allow Bromley’s planning officers to re-negotiate some aspects with the LDA.

BLOG-UP John Getgood, Councillor for Penge and Cator ward and member of the DCC was quick to give a resumé of the hearing on his blog. He wrote: "Many of the objections were unfounded or misguided.” In fact the objections were not unfounded or misguided but coherent and unchallenged, and undisputed by members of the DCC, who sought only points of clarification. Cllr McBride (Cray Valley East) said the LDA waving a large cheque in the air was not a case for 'very special circumstances'.

Cllr Getgood’s claim that: "None of the proposed building is on land currently open to the general users of the Park" fails to recognise that the public are welcome on all the areas proposed for housing, except the Park maintenance area, which is to be rebuilt on the site of the derelict Park Manager’s house 200 yards away. However, ‘general users of the Park’ might not be so welcome on the private property of 180 new flats.

It is the public who use the One O’Clock club. It is the public who use the facilities of the camping and caravan site, in large numbers, every day of the year, and then visit the Park, the Triangle and the surrounding area.

The LDA have spoken repeatedly of their wish to increase visitor numbers to the Park to generate income whilst proposing closure of a facility that does just that.

Cllr Getgood is mistaken when he maintains that: "There is no precedent for building on park land here. In any case, in planning law you cannot argue that because a principle was allowed once, it should be allowed again.” Although there can be no precedents in planning law, the claim by objectors to the LDA application concerning the sale of public parkland for residential development, does not involve planning law, which applies only when an application is made. It is the sale of public parkland for commercial development that would establish a precedent.

He is also wrong in his assumption that: "The legal agreement between the Council and the LDA ensures that all money raised by the sale of housing will be ring fenced for use in the first phase of improvements.” All money raised by the sale of housing will not be ring-fenced for use in the first phase of improvements, but pocketed by the developers.

The legal agreement misunderstood

by Cllr Getgood applies to money raised by sale of land, not houses.

Cllr Papworth made strong objection to the LDA Masterplan application on behalf of the thousands of his constituents living far closer to the Park than those of Cllr Getgood.

The best justification that Bromley Chief Planner, Bob McQuillan could offer for the building of private residential housing on Metropolitan Open Land and on land adjoining MOL, on a Grade II* registered Park was: “As the Mayor and the GLA said in their letter it’s not a precedent because it’s unique. There is only one Crystal Palace Park therefore it can’t be a precedent for any other Crystal Palace Park because there isn’t one.”

After lengthy discussion, but with no reference to the reservations of Pearson in the report commissioned by Bromley, the LDA application was approved by a majority (11 to 5).

THE LDA ...

TAKING CARE OF LONDON’S MONEY The LDA, having spent a reported £14 million in essential works to keep the NSC as a facility for possible training until the 2012 Olympics, propose to then board it over for five-a-side football and other ‘dry’ sports.

This £14 million expenditure for a three year facility is more than the £12 million the LDA claim must be raised by sale of precious Crystal Palace Parkland to fund the Park Masterplan over 20 to 30 years.

Page 5

FROM THE CHAIR...

PARKLAND GRAB A CHEAP TRANSPORT OPTION? Despite the Mayor’s funding problems, Transport for London (TfL) maintain the option of routing the Croydon Tramlink extension up Anerley Hill and into the Park where they would build a tram terminus in the Park hilltop and double the size of the existing bus station - all on MOL. Mayor Johnson has, for the moment, halted proposals due to lack of funding, but a planning condition keeps this option open to TfL for 10 years.

TfL have discovered, to its advantage, that routing tramlines and associated infrastructure through parks avoids compulsory purchase orders, land costs and costly changes to road networks.

No evidence has been provided

by TfL that the proposed tram extension would produce cash benefits for the Park or local trade in Upper Norwood. Indeed the reverse is more probable with people using the tram to travel to large town centres such as Croydon or Wimbledon.

Exhaustive research must be conducted before committing to a costly capital project (up from the original £70 million to over £170 million) to consider any benefits of bringing trams to Crystal Palace. Those supporting the tram extension should recognise that a tram to Crystal Palace might harm rather than help the area.

Perhaps the cuts made to vital existing train services to London, Croydon and beyond are just a cynical ploy to ‘justify’ extending tram services throughout London via our green urban spaces.

Page 6

THE FUTURE FOR OUR PARKS? The LDA does not conceal its intention to make Crystal Palace Park as near self-sufficient as possible. But should our public parks be financed by commercial exploitation? Will our Park be the model for future funding of all parks? How can these vital green lungs in our densely urbanised landscape be protected from commercial development which would require a high return on investment? Already developers have spotted the opportunity and are proposing a ‘rebuilt Crystal Palace’ in the Park; in reality a vast hotel, conference, retail and leisure centre, promoted as a fairy tale, but in truth a desecration of public parkland for private profit.

Local authority spending on park maintenance has dropped by a staggering 35% in the last 17 years. National Audit figures show that expenditure on green space has not kept pace with the increasing level of overall local authority spending, or the increasing amounts spent on other environmental and cultural services.

Bromley’s neglect of Crystal Palace Park and approval of an LDA Masterplan application, including housing in the Park, can now be copied by other councils, in allowing private residential development in their public parks as part of their funding strategy.

Instead of absolute presumption against blatant misuse of public open space, it can now be exploited on the spurious claim of ‘regeneration’.

What is needed is a new initiative to fund our failing green spaces - one based on national policy. With ever-increasing housing densities, and limited or no amenity space, the Government and the London Mayor must recognise the crucial role that

parks play and the problems they face, and enact legislation to ensure these precious open spaces in our urban environment are protected for us and future generations.

CLOSED MEETINGS CONTINUE CPCA members will remember the exclusion of the CPCA from LDA facilitated Park Working Group meetings. This was a consequence of our refusal to sign the mandatory 'code of conduct' that would have imposed secrecy, prohibited the taking of written notes and negated our rights to report back to our committee and members. Such compliance would have conflicted with our function and constitution.

Some attendees voiced concerns over this 'code of conduct' but continued to meet, prepared to accept this obstruction of democracy, while others were unsympathetic to CPCA ideals and opposition to the sale of Parkland for private luxury blocks of flats. Consequently, four members of the CPCA, including the Chairman, were the subject of defamatory statements on the LDA website - statements that are still in place today.

Quasi-public meetings were discontinued by the LDA after submission of the Park planning application in November 2008.

This has not however prevented former Park Working Group attendees continuing to meet on their own terms. Invitations to a new forum where Crystal Palace Park would be discussed were sent by Peter Austin of the Norwood Society and Ray Sacks of the Crystal Palace Campaign (a supporter of LDA park sell-off for housing) to former PWG attendees and the LDA. The CPCA however was not invited to join, and continues to be discriminated against by amenity groups, and other organisations claiming representative status but who have no membership, meetings, openness or accountability,

do not answer letters from members of the public and in some cases have no published accounts.

LDA PARK STAKEHOLDER DIALOGUE MEETINGS

Commendably, three local organisations, the Dulwich, Norwood and Sydenham Societies, made written objection to sale of Crystal Palace Parkland for housing.

Even if you are registered to attend LDA Crystal Palace Park Stakeholder Dialogue meetings you must now register again!

This further condition qualifies public rights of participation in Crystal Palace Park Stakeholder Dialogue meetings.

The Norwood Society in a letter to Bromley “strongly opposed” the sale of parts of the park for housing development and opposed “the kind of commercial approach which envisages selling off parts of a statutorily listed park (or of Metropolitan Open Land) in order to finance the regeneration of what is left, especially when the park in question has such a famous history and serves such a large community.”

All those who attended the LDA Crystal Palace Park Stakeholder Dialogue meetings at the Salvation Army Hall and elsewhere over the last 6 years, should have received a letter from Nigel Westaway, and Erica Sutton of The Environment Council, dated 14 November 2008, stating that they would no longer be the facilitators of any future Park consultation.

Nigel Westaway and The Environment Council, previously contracted by the LDA as facilitators, will now not confirm contact details to the LDA, claiming that this would conflict with the Data Protection Act and their own rules of conduct.

The Dulwich Society welcomed the uncontroversial issue of the greening of the Park, but had “…very strong reservations about the proposed housing.” They did not believe that “…the inclusion of housing in currently designated open space, the Rockhills site which is Metropolitan Open Land, is an appropriate way to generate funding for a section of the proposed improvements” adding “…the LDA should be able to provide the appropriate funding without recourse to commercial development and the consequent loss of part of the park.”

However, there may be future Park stakeholder consultation which will be facilitated by the London Development Agency, when most bizarrely, all those who have regularly attended LDA Park consultation meetings must now apply to the LDA to continue to do so.

The Sydenham Society reminded Bromley who had also attended Stakeholder Dialogue meetings, that they had regularly voiced concerns about the proposals for housing on both Rockhills MOL and ‘infill’ on Crystal Palace Park Road.

The London Development Agency draft Deed of Planning Obligation, 8 January 2009 for Council review, reads as follows:

It is perhaps disappointing that these societies did not attend the Development Control Committee hearing on 9 December 2008 as objectors to the LDA Masterplan.

Just consider what might have been achieved had those, tasked with safeguarding their members’ interests, acted together rather than continuing to focus their energies on discrediting others.

John Payne

Any who wish to register with the LDA should use the reference Crystal Palace Park and send contact details to:

LDA Public Liaison Unit Palestra 197 Blackfriars Road London SE1 8AA or email: info@lda.gov.uk phone 020 7593 9000 or text phone: 020 7593 8001

TRAFFIC MONITORING SYDENHAM HILL

Clause 3.1: “Within 6 months of occupation of each of the Rockhills Block 2 Residential and the Rockhills Block 3 Residential, the Developer shall carry out a survey to monitor traffic conditions on roads within the vicinity of Rockhills and in particular the impact of the Rockhills Block 2 Residential and the Rockhills Block 3 Residential on the Rockhills junction.”

Clause 3.2: “If the traffic monitoring survey carried out pursuant to the clause above demonstrates an adverse impact on traffic in the surrounding area,

in consultation with Transport for London, the Developer shall fund the following measures in relation to the roads within the vicinity of the Rockhills area: 3.2.1: localised loading and/or waiting restrictions; and 3.2.2: modifications to traffic signals.”

This suggests that should additional traffic generated from the new 132 apartments at Rockhills cause transport problems, TfL/LDA would impose new parking restrictions and changes to the traffic signals. Also, existing roads, and the mini-roundabouts campaigned for by local residents to keep traffic flowing at this bottleneck, could be replaced by traffic lights and traffic jams.

Page 7

THE MAYOR RULES OK Bromley’s approval of the LDA Masterplan application with its 180 luxury apartments begs the question: how many more houses will be on this precious park in 5, 10 or 20 years time?

His predecessor, and possible successor, Ken Livingstone, endorsed the sale of Crystal Palace Parkland for thirty pieces of silver, and the future of this and other public parks and open spaces across the country is now threatened.

The present Mayor has shown no inclination to recognise the green and open space of Crystal Palace Park as part of his grand vision to protect London’s green and open spaces. He is unlikely to exercise his prerogative and reverse a planning decision on an LDA application that fundamentally is his own.

MAYOR JOHNSON RECEIVES PLANNING AWARD

The sale of public parkland for even just one flat would be greeted with great delight by developers across the country as the go-ahead for exploitation of the nation’s precious green open spaces.

The sale of public parkland for private housing against huge public opposition, has won this year’s award for worst planning decision. Each year Cllr Darren Johnson, Green Party London Assembly member, awards an

inscripted breeze-block for the planning decision he considers to be the most damaging to London.

Darren Johnson commented: “The selling of land within Crystal Palace Park for 180 private luxury flats to fund the park’s regeneration is unacceptable and the Government is right to question it. Not only is it counter to the strength of local feeling but it will set a precedent that is likely to threaten the future of public parks and other open spaces throughout the country.”

“By refusing to block the building of these flats in a park ...he has chosen to ignore the contradiction of running a competition* to enhance London’s parks whilst at the same time giving the go ahead to build over a section of one.” * ‘Priority parks project’: “...we will be able to inject much-needed money into improving the most neglected parks and gardens across London” said Mayor Johnson. He could have added: except when we sell them off for private development first.

The LDA’s proposed sale of Crystal Palace Parkland for housing, which Mayor Boris Johnson refused to block, wins Darren Johnson’s Dodgy Planning Award 2009 Page 8

IS BORIS

J U S T A N OT H E R

KEN?

“Anyone who believes a politician must be mad...” Ken Livingstone

PEOPLE’S QUESTION TIME AT BROMLEY CIVIC CENTRE, 6 NOVEMBER 2008 It was no surprise that Mayor Johnson’s first People’s Question Time at Bromley was a sell-out.

Despite holding tickets obtained in advance from the GLA, more than 200 furious people were turned away at the door by police and security staff.

Prior to the meeting the CPCA expressed strong concerns to the GLA that residents in the northwest of the borough had not been properly notified of the event and that the venue would not be large enough. The GLA response was that they did not want too many people as they would not all be able to ask questions and get answers! The logic of this is unfathomable as the number of questions is determined by the Chair and the time available, which could not be affected by the number of persons present. On the night, political meandering by

London Assembly Chair, Jennette Arnold and ponderous quips by PQT Chairman James Cleverly and the London Mayor, wasted much of the limited time available.

Despite this, CPCA Hon Secretary, Suzanne Elkin, was able to ask the Mayor if he would withdraw the controversial proposal for sale of public parkland for private development from the LDA planning application to Bromley.

The Mayor failed to answer the question or acknowledge his preelection pledge for Crystal Palace Park that he did “...not feel the building of houses on this precious parkland is a suitable way forward”.

Completely transposing the question from one clearly addressed to him to one addressed to Bromley Council, the Mayor said: “I know what a keen and sensitive issue this is ... the matter must be decided by the London Borough of

Bromley. If the London Borough of Bromley throws it out, as it is entirely within their rights to do, then I will of course completely support and accord with that decision because that was what I said when I stood to be your Mayor”. It is of concern that Mayor Johnson can remember with vivid clarity some preelection pledges, but forget others.

Such betrayal of undertaking is not endorsed by Conservative Assembly Member, Roger Evans, who in reference to the Crystal Palace Park PQT question, wrote on his website: “For my own part, I believe that we should try to keep promises made during an election.”

Any further discussion on the sale of public Metropolitan Open Land to private developers, which many considered the most important issue of the meeting, was refused by the Chairman.

Page 9

PARK IMPROVEMENTS PROMISED ...

BUT THE HOUSING COMES FIRST! The “First Draft” agreement (8.1.09) between Bromley Council and LDA (“the Developer”), sets out the ‘Deed of Planning Obligations’ between Council and Developer for the Park Masterplan application. It differs from that shown to Bromley councillors at the DCC meeting of 9 December 2008, where Bromley granted planning approval.

In this new ‘Deed’, under Developer’s Obligations it states under: “1. Residential Development and Park Improvements” (in that order) that “prior to Occupation” (not prior to construction) of the ‘Residential’, the Developer must carry out certain Park Works: Part A for Sydenham Gate, Part B for Rockhills Block 2 and Part C for Rockhills Block 3 Residential.

The Park Works, Parts A, B and C include tree planting to the upper Palace Terrace (hilltop), Palace Terrace restoration, creation of water features, relocation of the Paxton Bust, demolition of the Paxton Suite (but not the Lodge Tower), provision of the café and Dinosaur Interpretation Centre, general landscaping works and one of the proposed playgrounds.

It seems that the Developer can build all 180 apartments on the Park but cannot allow their occupation until some Park improvement work has been done. However, the Developer needs only spend a minimum sum on the Park to achieve this.

The Deed states that the minimums are: £5 million on Part A works, to enable sale of the 40 Sydenham Gate apartments. £6 million on Part B works to enable sale of some of the 132 Rockhills Block 2 apartments and £1 million on Part C works to enable sale of the remaining Rockhills Block 3 apartments.

Page 10

Thus the total minimum expenditure required of the Developer is £12 million.

The restoration of the Terraces is estimated by English Heritage to cost £12 million and the wording of the Deed of Obligation is such that the Developer could allocate all £12 million to this project alone. £12 million also just happens to be the expected revenue from the sale of Parkland.

So the balance sheet could read: Public loss: Crystal Palace Grade II*, MOL and Conservation Area Parkland, London’s only camping & caravan ground, children’s nursery & One o’clock club, recently built HLF publicly funded Park maintenance depot, St John’s Ambulance station.

Public gain: Restored terraces but little more

housing could be built and sold but Parts A, B and C works might never be completed and ... Parts A, B and C are just basic Park improvements.

ADVICE IGNORED Key areas of concern, highlighted

by Bromley’s independent experts Nicholas Pearson Associates, have not been addressed by the LDA. They are: initial funding and security of funding; continuing financial sustainability; level of investment to be made in the Park and the facilities and infrastructure to be supported; future Park management; ability to secure and ring-fence Park income; effectiveness efficiency of the managing organisation and responsibility for delivery of the Park amenities over the next twenty years.

The CPCA supports the laudable aim of improving the Park but the Masterplan is misleading and flawed and based on assumptions.

Developer/LDA gain: £12 million minus £?? million in cost of relocating Caravan Club, One o’clock club, Park maintenance depot, cost of reconstruction of One o’clock club and Park maintenance depot

CROYDON ASKS: CAN THE LDA DELIVER?

Housing developer’s gain: 180 private luxury apartments sold in prime 200-acre parkland location.

Even Croydon Council questions LDA ability to deliver the Masterplan.

SELLING ON - WITH PLANNING PERMISSION

Croydon’s letter to Bromley of 22 September 2008 advising of the outcome of the Planning Meeting to discuss the Masterplan, states:

The ‘Deed of Planning Obligations’ also states that should the LDA sell the land to another developer there is nothing in the Deed that would stop the new developer selling the flats for occupation before any Parts A, B or C works were completed.

The LDA then has 3 years in which to complete the A, B and C works. If, however, the LDA was disbanded without completing those works, there is no assurance that the body taking over the LDA’s liabilities would itself be adequately funded. So, the

“There are concerns in relation to the absence of an overall funding strategy which could potentially result in the scheme being delivered in a non-comprehensive way or perhaps certain elements would not be delivered at all. This makes it difficult to consider whether the parts given over to housing development would be a sacrifice worth making. It should be considered whether there are measures in place to ensure that situation does not arise whereby the residential development is constructed yet other parts of the scheme are not delivered.”

Stand by that promise to London’s parks, Boris

Crystal Palace Park is a bit bigger than a back garden. Or, if you prefer, it is a back garden for about 200,000 Londoners. But an application to build 180 homes on it and on adjacent metropolitan open land, has just been approved

by Bromley Council. And the applicant is - that same Mayor of London. Forget developer landgrabs: Boris, in the form of his London Development Agency, appears to be cutting out the middleman.

It's true that not all the open land to be built on is open to the public: most of it is currently used as a tree-lined caravan park (though some is part of the park proper). It's true that the most controversial part of the proposal, a new multi-storey housing and retail block, has been removed.

The LDA also says the revenue from the housing (none of which will be classed as "affordable") is needed to help pay for improving the rest of the run-down park.

In London, however, our patrimony, held in trust for the public, is clearly seen as a tradeable asset, to be bargained for short-term purposes. Crystal Palace is not the only park under threat. Part of Deptford Park has already been built on.

At Gunnersbury Park there are plans for a "significant acreage" to be taken by "a small number of high-spec houses". And at Greenwich, of course, there's the even more extraordinary proposal to risk the park's most precious features for a week of televised horse riding.

Y

ou know, I remember a certain Tory Mayor of London who during his election campaign, and since, promised to "protect green spaces", "protect London's open spaces from development", make the capital "a leafier, more pleasant place to live" and even "defend back gardens� from developer land-grabs.

It's something to benefit the whole community, not just sections of it. It's the only municipal service, apart from refuse collection, that many taxpayers use. Civilised governments provide varying services -not all, for instance, pay for healthcare - but they all pay for parks.

ANDREW GILLIGAN But we are still creating a dangerous precedent: not just for replacing trees and grass with concrete and brick; not just for building on metropolitan open land, which is meant to be protected; but also for funding improvements by chipping away at what we are supposed to be improving.

I would not expect the NHS to defray the cost of my heart bypass operation by asking me to donate a kidney. And a park lives a lot longer than a person. Crystal Palace is one of only 30 Grade II* listed parks in Britain precisely because it has been preserved for the past 150 years. If we knock bits off every few decades to pay for the latest upgrade, there won't be much left in another 150 years' time.

A park is almost the definition of the public realm. It's precisely what the public purse should be for.

The benefits in every one of these cases are nugatory, far outweighed by the damage they will do. Even at Crystal Palace, the new housing will provide only about a tenth of the money needed to do up the park. Would it be too cynical to fear that we'll get the houses but not many of the improvements?

In policing, in transport, in most other areas Boris has, I think, started brilliantly down the change road that London so needed. But in planning, not enough has changed.

Inappropriate tall buildings are still being allowed. Ken-era plans, such as the LDA's for Crystal Palace, have gone unchallenged.

London is a city of parks. In compromising our parks, Boris and the capital's councils are losing sight of their basic public purpose.

This article is reprinted from the London Evening Standard 29 December 2008

Page 11

NEIGHBOURING BOROUGHS OPPOSE HOUSING ON CRYSTAL PALACE PARK It is customary for councils to comment on major borough planning applications likely to impact on their borough. The four boroughs adjacent to Crystal Palace Park were invited to comment on the LDA Masterplan application by Chris Evans, Development Control Manager Major Applications Team for Bromley. Lewisham, Southwark and Lambeth delegated authority to council officers to respond to the application, while Croydon referred it to its planning committee. All four neighbouring boroughs opposed sale of parkland for housing.

LEWISHAM Joost Van Well, Team Leader South Team of Lewisham Council Planning Service wrote in July 2008: “Lewisham Council generally welcomes the proposals for Crystal Palace Park, which are seen as high quality and generally respecting the original qualities and principles of the park.

However, the London Borough of Lewisham is concerned about the residential units which are proposed as part of this regeneration of Crystal Palace Park. Policy 3D.9 of the London Plan provides for the protection of MOL and states that the boundary of MOL should only be altered in exceptional circumstances and should be undertaken through the development plan process.

Under the London Plan, MOL is stated to serve a similar purpose to the Green Belt and is to be afforded the same protection.

Development which involves the loss of MOL in return for its replacement with new open space elsewhere is not acceptable.

Lewisham Council is so far not convinced that there are the 'very special circumstances' which would justify this notable reduction of MOL, and the large number of homes which would be built on this MOL. Given that MOL is the same as the Green Belt in terms of protection from development, PPG2 (Green Belts) is also of particular relevance. This states that the fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; the most important attribute of Green Belts being their openness. There is a general presumption against inappropriate development within Green Belts and such

development is, by definition, harmful and should not be approved, except in very special circumstances. Very special circumstances to justify inappropriate development will not exist unless the harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations.

Lewisham Council is so far not convinced that there are the 'very special circumstances' which would justify this notable reduction of MOL, and the large number of homes which would be built on this MOL. The main justification for this appears to be the financial viability of the entire scheme, but it appears that the residential development would only finance a small proportion of the overall costs. Furthermore, no affordable housing is proposed as part of the mix of houses, and as such it is considered that the housing does not fully meet housing needs in the locale.”

SOUTHWARK Gary Rice, Head of Development Control at Southwark Council wrote in June 2008: “The Council’s formal response is: Objection is raised to the proposed development on the following ground[s]:

Crystal Palace Park: inappropriate use of a Grade II* registered Metropolitan Open Land Park. TfL wish to encroach even further and double the size of the bus terminus.

Page 12

1. The proposal would result in substantial new residential development on Metropolitan Open Land and land adjoining MOL that has not previously been developed in this way, contrary to Policy 3D.10 of the London Plan.

2. The proposal would fail to provide any affordable housing or other contributions to mitigate against the impacts of such a large residential scheme placing undue strain on existing health, education, and transport facilities having a direct impact on the services within the London Borough of Southwark. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy 3A 8-11 of the London Plan and DCLG Circular 05/05.

3. The proposal would result in the displacement of the existing caravan site with no alternative location provided to the detriment of people who use this facility contrary to the objectives of Policy 3D.7 Visitors accommodation and facilities.

4. The proposed height of the residential blocks would be uncharacteristic to the area and would undermine the open aspect of the existing park and the green outlook it currently offers, contrary to Policy 4B.01 of the London Plan.

5. The proposal fails to demonstrate how it would meet the 20% renewable energy requirement of the London Plan contrary to Policies 4A.3, 4A.4 and 4A.7 of the London Plan.”

On behalf of his Southwark College Ward colleagues Cllrs Lewis Robinson and Michelle Holford, Cllr Kim Humphreys wrote separately in support of his officer’s statements of objection to the LDA Masterplan. College Ward extends to the border of the Park at Sydenham Hill.

“The proposal would result in substantial new residential development on Metropolitan Open Land and land adjoining MOL …

The proposal would result in the displacement of the existing caravan site with no alternative location provided” Southwark Council

LAMBETH Lambeth Gipsy Hill ward councillor, Cllr Andrew Gibson, wrote to Bromley on behalf of his ward colleagues Cllrs Suzanne Poole and Graham Pycock.

“While I am open to improvements to the parkland, I am very concerned about the proposal to use land for housing.

There is a principle at stake here: developers should be required to formulate their plans without their proposing to eat up protected parkland. Each incremental taking of parkland might seem reasonable in itself, but the effect is cumulative. Just two months ago Lambeth Council gave permission to utilise part of Brockwell Park for an extra traffic lane. I am concerned that we are chipping away at our inheritance in a way that is irreversible.

I understand that each application must be judged on its own merits: as this application proposes so many houses, in contravention of policies to protect open land, I feel that this application can be turned down on its own lack of merit.

On the above grounds, I oppose the plans as currently presented, and hope that the application will be rejected.”

James Ireland of Lambeth’s planning team forwarded Lambeth Council’s observations on 30 June 2008 as follows: “Lambeth Council should in principle be supportive of the

“The major policy conflict created by the application still lies with the proposed residential development of parts of the park, the majority of which is designated Metropolitan Open Land. … there is a real concern that such a proposal could cause a precedent for other MOL land in London.”

Lambeth Council

positive approach of the LDA and London Borough of Bromley to improving the condition of Crystal Palace Park and creating modern sports facilities there. An improved park and state-of-the-art sports facilities will not only benefit residents within the Crystal Palace and Borough of Bromley area, but will benefit residents of adjoining Boroughs and effectively London as a whole.

The major policy conflict created by the application still lies with the proposed residential development of parts of the park, the majority of which is designated Metropolitan Open Land. The London Development Agency has put together an argument why an exception should be made to this policy at Rockhills Gate (designated MOL) and Sydenham Gate (not within MOL, but within the park boundary). It will be for the Borough of Bromley to determine whether this argument for exception is acceptable. However, there is a real concern that such a proposal could cause a precedent for other MOL land in London.”

Latz + Partner/Meadowcroft Griffin illustrative elevation of the proposed Rockhills residential, as seen from the Park. Reproduced courtesy LDA. For full details of the application visit www.crystalpalacepark.org Masterplan Design & Access Statement Vol.1.

Page 13

CROYDON: On 18 September 2008, having heard the 11,000-page, £67.5 million planning application summarised in just two minutes, Croydon’s Planning Committee were recommended to approve the application.

Only after protests from the public gallery did Croydon’s planning officer reveal that the application included the sale of public parkland for blocks of 180 private luxury flats.

Cllr Buttinger asked for confirmation that it was: “the intention to sell areas of protected public parkland for residential development”, to which the officer said: “Yes”.

Members unanimously objected to proposals for housing but welcomed possible improvements to the Park. Cllr Scott said: “the housing is the only really contentious part of the scheme”. Cllr Filbey said: “Housing is not the solution to fund the Park… Building on Metropolitan Open Land is not the answer. No No”.

Cllr Scott said: “the important issue now is to see open space maintained”, while Cllr Khan said: “the MOL is the people’s inheritance”.

Cllr Perry gave assurance that “Green Belt and Metropolitan Open Land is safe in Croydon.” He agreed

with the Council officer’s recommendation that there should be ‘no objection in principle’ but that there was probably a consensus on the Committee against the housing. He said that Croydon’s report to Bromley should reflect this, and a paragraph should be added stating that, “it is not appropriate that parkland is being sold for housing”.

The Committee accepted the officer’s recommendation that no objection to the application be raised in principle, with the proviso that a number of conditions be added including the inappropriateness of selling parkland for housing.

Cllr Perry said that Croydon’s report to Bromley should reflect the Committee’s consensus against housing and a paragraph should be added stating that, “it is not appropriate that parkland is being sold for housing”.

Subsequently, Bromley received a letter from Rory Macleod, Head of Planning Control at Croydon Council, stating: “I write to advise you that at the Planning Committee Business meeting held on 18/09/2008, it was resolved that this Council as

adjoining Local Planning Authority wishes to raise no objection to the application.” Attached was a copy of the officer’s original recommendation, without the addendum agreed by councillors that a number of conditions be added including the inappropriateness of selling parkland for housing.

After the CPCA alerted both Croydon and Chris Evans to this crucial omission, Croydon’s website was amended to show the Minutes of that meeting, as: “RESOLVED that no objection be raised in principle, but that the contents of the report and minutes be forwarded to the London Borough of Bromley for consideration. The Planning Committee were also keen to convey their concern about the principle of residential development on Metropolitan Open Land, in particular the Rockhills residential scheme within the English Landscape of the Park.”

Chris Evans has accepted Croydon’s objection to the housing element of the Masterplan, and wrote to the CPCA: “ I see that the minutes record the additional concern about residential development on MOL and this will be noted in the report to the DC Committee.”

All four neighbouring councils are aligned with the 7,000 who signed the petition against the sale of Crystal Palace Parkland for private housing, with the hundreds who wrote letters of objection to Bromley on this aspect of the Masterplan and with the views of the overwhelming majority at the LDA’s own consultation meetings.

Such abuse of an historic public park is rejected, and the precedent that would be established if parkland is sold to pay for its own improvement, recognised.

Latz + Partner/Meadowcroft Griffin illustrative elevation of the proposed six Sydenham Gate villas, as seen from Crystal Palace Park Road. Reproduced courtesy LDA. For full details of the application visit www.crystalpalacepark.org Masterplan Design & Access Statement Vol.1.

Page 14

BLOCKS OF FLATS FOR OTHER BROMLEY PARKS? The LDA Masterplan application should have been determined on the Park’s current status and function, not on false and misleading LDA statements.

Would Bromley Council sell MOL public parkland to allow construction of 5-storey blocks of private luxury flats if the park in question was Kelsey Park, Norman Park, Hayes Park, Ravensbourne Open Space or Church House Gardens? They are all major Bromley parks, but not remote on the northern edge of the borough as is Crystal Palace Park. Perhaps Bromley Council does intend to build in its other parks but first needs to set the precedent?

The 18 councillors comprising Bromley Council Development Control Committee represented: Chislehurst (2), Farnborough & Crofton (2), Petts Wood & Knoll (2), Cray Valley East (2), Cray Valley West, Chelsfield & Pratts Bottom, Darwin, West Wickham, Bickley, Hayes & Coney Hall, Bromley Common & Keston, Biggin Hill and Shortlands (1), with one (John Getgood) from Penge & Cator but none from Crystal Palace & Anerley and none actually live in the area.

A CPCA member asked: “As members of my local council should Bromley protect Metropolitan Open Land within the borough?” Only three out of the seven councillors approached responded.

Cllr Getgood replied: “ Yes, we do believe that Bromley should protect Metropolitan Open Land just as we support protection for the Green Belt. However, that cannot always be a hard and fast rule covering each and every case. There are some areas of the Green Belt that were appropriate for designation 60 years ago which do now need

reviewing. I would argue that MOL is even more important as it is often the only green lung for people living in more urban areas. However, there may be times when a greater gain can be achieved by sacrificing some areas of MOL or areas of MOL can be enhanced by adjustments. It would plainly be unsustainable to argue that no area of MOL should be touched whatever the circumstances.

So, while upholding the general principle, I am afraid it's got to be every case on its merits. Not the answer you were hoping for, perhaps, but I can assure you that this is the reality of the situation whatever others might tell you.” His ward colleague, Cllr Fookes, agreed with him saying: “John is absolutely right on this.”

It is most regrettable that Bromley’s departure from previous strong resistance to applications in the borough for building on Metropolitan Open Land, applies to Crystal Palace Park.

Crystal Palace councillor, John Canvin, replied: “Any proposals for the use of Metropolitan Open Land will require the closest scrutiny. The proposal for its use is much dependant on its past history and will require deepest consideration.”

Cllr Canvin is quite correct.

Development applications should be considered on their merits, and their historic significance respected. But the LDA falsely claim that there is a history of building villas “on former parts of the Park and, as in many public parks of the period, their construction was used to finance the Park.” However, the villas on Crystal Palace Park

Road were not constructed to finance the Park but to save the commercially operated Crystal Palace Company from bankruptcy in 1869, four years after Paxton’s death. The grounds of the Crystal Palace were not those of a public park but those of a commercial venture, charging an admission fee, until the destruction of the Palace in 1936.

Bromley should have considered the LDA Masterplan application against the Park’s current status, function and future expectations, and not on misleading claims based on past history, when the land was under private ownership of the Crystal Palace Company Ltd.

MORE PARK HOUSING? During limited stakeholder consultation, the LDA gave assurance that no additional housing would be built on Crystal Palace Park at some future date.

Notwithstanding the CPCA’s opposition to any private housing on the Park, there is no mention of this LDA loose assurance in the Masterplan application concerning future sale of parkland.

Chris Evans, Bromley Major Developments Team Manager who was charged with writing the report for the Development Control Committee on the LDA Masterplan application, a mammoth task taking several months, was asked: whether such assurance had been incorporated into any 'condition', or in the terms of the proposed 125-year lease”.

Mr Evans replied: “We [Bromley] can’t impose a condition to prevent a future planning application being submitted.”

Will this LDA assurance be as worthless as their public pledge “housing would be a last resort” (LDA newsletter August 2007) which within the month became “Housing is vital”.

How many more LDA U-turns are there likely to be during the proposed Masterplan construction period over 20 - 30 years?

Page 15

FA L S I F I C AT I O N O F T H E FA C T S Perhaps the most contentious aspect of the LDA Masterplan has been its latest insistence that sale of parkland for housing is now “vital” to enable the Park to receive basic improvements.

earmarked for blocks of flats was not actually part of the Park, he said this was based on information provided to him.

However later, Mr Latz accepted that it was incorrect and that all areas designated for housing were within the Park boundary.

Bromley’s media release of 10 December 2008 states: “One of the residential sites, the Rockhills site, whilst not part of the Park, is classified as Metropolitan Open Land (MOL)” which suggests that the Development Control Committee approval of the Masterplan was based on false and misleading information.

Incorrect and misleading information continues to be disseminated, but now also by the London Mayor.

As all but one of the members of that committee live in wards far distant from the Park, their decision depended on information given to them rather than actual local knowledge.

When Tilman Latz, of Latz + Partner, the LDA Masterplan landscape architect, stated at a public consultation meeting two years ago that one particular area

Boris Johnson is issuing a standard letter in response to written questions from the public about the proposed housing on Crystal Palace Park. His letter states: “…whilst some of the housing is on land that is classified as Metropolitan Open Land, it is all on land that has previously been built on, and that has never been part of the formal Park.”

This is false. All the land proposed for the housing is within the Park boundary.

The only house ever built on the Rockhills area (now MOL) was Sir Joseph Paxton's residence and

later home of Sir Henry Buckland, General Manager of Crystal Palace Park until 1956. This former listed building was demolished during 1960. The area of land, known as Rockhills, was formally incorporated into the Park on 1st January 1972 and a ‘jogging’ trail was established in 1978. Bromley Council relocated The Caravan Club (introduced at Crystal Palace in 1952) from another area of the Park to the ‘Rockhills’ corner in 1989.

This is confirmed in a “Draft Landscape Plan” prepared and written by the Crystal Palace Park Manager, Patrick Phillips, for Bromley Council in 1986 and the Park boundary is clearly delineated on English Heritage’s Register of Historic Parks & Gardens and on Land Registry document. All are available to the public.

What trust can we place in Bromley and the LDA when falsification is used so blatantly to force through a controversial and widely opposed scheme?

Register of Parks and Gardens Name: CRYSTAL PALACE PARK Number: PG1324 Grade: II* Registration date: 01/10/1987 County/UA: GREATER LONDON District: BROMLEY Map centred on NGR: TQ3429870933 Boundary captured at: 1:10000 Map scale: 1:10,000 Extract from OS sheet(s): TQ36NW; TQ37SW; TQ36NE; TQ37SE Key:

From the English Heritage Register of Parks and Gardens: Crystal Palace Park.

Reproduced courtesy English Heritage

Page 16

Designated Park and Garden Sheet 1 of 1 Print date: 22 February 2002 This map is reproduced from the OS map by English Heritage with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, cCrown Copyright.Licence Number GD030859G cEnglish Heritage ENGLISH HERITAGE 23 Savile Row, London W1S 2ET Telephone 020 7973 3000 Fax 020 7973 3001

ENABLING DEVELOPMENT ...

THE ENGLISH HERITAGE VERSION

E

nglish Heritage is prolific in its publication of strategies and policies to protect the historic environment. One such publication is ‘Enabling Development and the Conservation of Heritage Assets’ which clearly sets out the nature of ‘enabling development’ and introduces in the form of guidance seven criteria, ALL of which must be met if enabling development is considered to be acceptable.

The London Development Agency claim that the proposed “vital” private housing development of 180 luxury apartments in Crystal Palace Park does not fall within “… the definition of enabling development as set out by English Heritage” but “…for completeness, it is prudent to consider this element of the proposal against this Government body”. Yet, perversely, in justification of ‘Very Special Circumstances’ the LDA state “the enabling development will not secure the long term future use of the Park in isolation but will make a significant and necessary contribution to the level one works…”

The CPCA 45-page letter of objection* to the LDA Masterplan including sale of parkland for housing cites English Heritage criteria and maintains that none have been met nor EH guidance followed. But concerningly, English Heritage takes the opposite

view without providing any substantiation.

In its letter of support for the LDA Masterplan including sale of parkland for housing, EH states: “English Heritage has looked carefully at the submitted application material and we believe that the proposed master plan and the development and other proposals within it do not materially harm the heritage value of the historic Park or its setting and that they fully meet the criteria set out in our guidance.”

selling protected public parkland on which it conferred Grade II * registration, as simply “local controversy”, ignores the views of the four neighbouring boroughs, local ward councillors, a 7,000strong petition, opinion polls in the press and the overwhelming results of the LDA’s own consultation – all of which demonstrates strong opposition to the housing and recognises the precedent this would establish. Moreover, the Secretary of State’s call-in of the application is evidence enough that serious national policies are being affected.

Perhaps we should not be surprised at this support for sale of parkland as this government quango previously gave full support to the Bromley-approved multiplex and the Kathryn Gustafson contemporary landscaping, much of which failed, was never implemented or is now being replaced.

In conclusion, EH states: “We recognise that certain elements of the proposals have generated a degree of local controversy but it is our belief that the relatively localised impacts of the most contentious elements, particularly the proposed housing, will not harm the character or appearance of the conservation area in general or the historic park in particular.”

English Heritage’s total disregard for the contentious nature of

It is however surprising that whilst English Heritage Chief Executive, Dr Simon Thurley, is keenly promoting within his organisation a culture of meaningful participation with the community in order to make English Heritage more prudent, open and transparent in its business dealings with the heritage asset, this is clearly not the case in Crystal Palace Park. * the CPCA formal objection to the LDA Masterplan can be viewed at www.cpca.org.uk

Page 17

LONDON HISTORIC LANDSCAPES SEMINAR On 26 February the CPCA attended the London Historic Parks seminar held in one of the two listed mansions at the 186acre Grade II* Gunnersbury Park, west London.

Sponsored by English Heritage, the London Parks & Gardens Trust and the boroughs of Hounslow and Ealing, the seminar discussed the future of our ‘protected’ historic parks and open spaces. Chris Sumner, formerly of English Heritage, and now of the London Parks and Gardens Trust, chaired the event.

Also attending were representatives of English Heritage, the Heritage Lottery Fund, the Greater London Authority, Royal Parks, the Lea Valley Regional Parks Authority and several local authorities including Bromley, Croydon, Lambeth and Southwark, as well as Friends’ groups and amenity societies.

The speakers were passionate about protecting parks for the future. Sue Ireland of the Corporation of London said: “We must take responsibility for what we have around us. Historic parks have been handed to us by previous generations. We must pass them on for future generations in good order or better. The best way of doing that is by working together.” Every speaker agreed that parks were vital to the quality of life in the community.

But the fine rhetoric throughout the day, failed to match the reality, as although Gunnersbury hosted the event, no reference was made to the proposed sale of 4.5 acres of the park for construction of 40 to 60 two-storey luxury houses.

Neither was Crystal Palace Park on the agenda.

Paul Stamper of the Heritage Protection Team at English Heritage defined the meaning of a registered park or garden as “designed landscapes of national Page 18

The Orangery at Gunnersbury Park

significance” and as such “the bar is set high”. He continued: “The main control is that registration is a material consideration if there is a planning application… the local planning authority will have to give due weight to the fact that this was a registered park and think very seriously about the impact of the planning proposal on the historic landscape itself”. This statement did not reflect the support given

by English Heritage to the sale of Grade II* registered Crystal Palace Parkland by his colleagues.

“Only the really special landscapes - internationally important is a good way of thinking about them - are afforded Grade II* protection” Paul Stamper, English Heritage

Discussing the Heritage Protection Bill, whereby local authorities will be given more responsibility for their heritage sites, he added: “EH Chief Executive Simon Thurley, English Heritage and the Government were resolutely committed to the reform of the way in which heritage is recognised and managed”. It seems this process has already begun

with the abdication of responsibility by English Heritage in welcoming the sale of registered public parkland for the promise of park improvements at Crystal Palace and Gunnersbury. Yet he continued: “Only the really special landscapes - internationally important is a good way of thinking about them - are afforded Grade II* protection. In terms of managing change it is the two upper groups [Grade I and II*] that English Heritage is primarily concerned with.”

As English Heritage has abdicated responsibility for Crystal Palace Park, Paul Stamper’s final comments: “that every effort will be made to protect and enhance the current parks and gardens especially those which appear on the English Heritage register” lacked conviction.

At question time, the CPCA introduced the sale of public parkland to enable basic park improvements and asked all present where this had happened already? Chair, Chris Sumner found this “a highly charged political question” and there was no interest from the panel. Only a representative from Tower Hamlets responded, saying: “it

happens a lot to us, but it doesn’t usually happen on parks that are historically significant”. She explained that parks in Tower Hamlets are often developed for social housing but usually, significant section 106 agreements are offered to the parks that remain, to improve their facilities, adding that unfortunately the councillors who are often members of the residential and social housing associations will usually prioritise housing need above green space and open space.

(Housing need is not an issue at Crystal Palace Park.)

Chris Sumner pointed out that there is no commitment on local authorities to spend money on their open spaces apart from maintaining them to a minimum standard under health and safety requirements.

Tony Leach, Director of the London Parks and Green Spaces Forum said in conclusion: “What London needs is a strategic parks authority which provides a mechanism for channelling funding to London’s strategic parks, the larger parks across London, which would include Gunnersbury Park, Crystal Palace Park and the like. Really like the old GLC parks before they were handed back to boroughs… We know from surveys that the general public

would be willing to pay a tax if they knew it was going to local parks.”

This statement was met with approval by those present.

WHO ARE ENGLISH HERITAGE?

Editor’s note:

“English Heritage exists to protect and promote England's spectacular historic environment and ensure that its past is researched and understood.”

Last year, a leaked document from the Ealing and Hounslow Council who jointly administer Gunnersbury Park Regeneration Board, showed a proposal to sell areas of parkland for luxury housing to help pay for the Park’s regeneration. Initially shelved following the threat of a community legal challenge, the proposal looms once more.

Paul Jardin, the Managing Director of Jura Consultants, the financial consultant for Hounslow and Ealing Councils, said: “We know the value of the park and the price of giving it up, but for the future benefit of the park, without enabling development, it [the regeneration] might just never happen”. Where have we heard that before, and how often will we hear it again?

Is the true meaning of consultation threat from politicians that preventing the sale of parkland will scupper all chance of future park improvements?

EH is the Government's statutory adviser on the historic environment. Sponsored by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, it works with a range of Government Departments, to help realise the potential of the historic environment.

Funded in part by the Government and revenue earned from its historic properties and other services, it received £129 million of public funding in 2005/06 and £41.9 million from other sources.

The work of English Heritage is overseen by a Chairman and a board of up to 16 Commissioners selected by the Government for the breadth of their national and regional expertise. The Commission is, in turn, advised by 13 expert advisory committees and panels.

English Heritage works in partnership with the central government departments, local authorities, voluntary bodies and the private sector to conserve and enhance the historic environment.

Some of its responsibilities are to act as a national and international champion for the heritage, advise on the preservation of the historic environment and encourage broader public involvement with the heritage.

FUNDING CONFUSION

The Small Mansion, Gunnersbury Park

Since the LDA took a 125-year lease on the National Sports Centre in March 2006, distinction between funding for a new regional sports centre and funding for the remainder of the Park has been obscured. The LDA has not always made it clear that the two are entirely separate.

Page 19

CRYSTAL PALACE CIVIC FORUM It has long been recognised by those who live and work in Crystal Palace that its location at the confluence of five boroughs limits opportunity for community participation in proposals for the area.

This situation results in piecemeal decision-making by the councils of Southwark, Lambeth, Croydon, Bromley and Lewisham, whose plans for their boroughs are sometimes made without consideration for crossborough impact. There is little evidence of cross-borough community consultation and respect for local knowledge of groups, such as the CPCA, which is often viewed by councils as interference to be overcome rather than as contribution to decision making.

LOCAL FORUMS To facilitate community involvement four of the five boroughs have local forums with varying delegated authority. Croydon has Neighbourhood Partnerships, Southwark has Community Councils, Lewisham has Local Assemblies and Lambeth is setting up its new Area Forums. Bromley still lacks any forums anywhere in its borough.

A NEW ACT The ‘Sustainable Communities Act 2007’ gives people the power to protect and enhance their communities. It establishes for the first time a co-operative method of devolved power and decision-making, rather than the inverted process that often ignores the ‘grassroots’ knowledge of local communities.

The Act provides the opportunity for a new forum, specific to the Crystal Palace area. Some innovative thinking is required from ALL boroughs to establish an effective cross-borough forum. The CPCA is working with others towards making such a forum a reality.

TAXPAYERS FOOT THE BILL FOR BROMLEY NEGLIGENCE Bromley’s failure to comply with European regulations has cost Bromley council taxpayers £275,000.

Following a European Court ruling that Bromley had failed to instruct an Environmental Impact Assessment prior to approval of the proposed development of a 20-screen cinema multiplex in Crystal Palace Park, the CPCA wrote, on numerous occasions, to Doug Patterson Bromley Chief Executive, requesting confirmation of the costs awarded against the Council. He failed to answer these letters throughout 2008 until advised of our intention to apply under the Freedom of Information Act. The CPCA has finally received confirmation that costs have been agreed at £275,000, which will be met by Bromley’s long-suffering council tax-payers.

Costs awarded against the UK Government for their part in this fiasco, are still unknown.

John Payne

T H E M E TA M O R P H O S I S O F T H E N S C Following extensive remedial works at the LDA’s Crystal Palace National Sports Centre to upgrade facilities and remove asbestos, the re-opening of the pool is scheduled for 25 April 2009. The LDA said: “We look forward to seeing Crystal Palace once again take its place as a major centre for sport in London”.

During People’s Question Time at Bromley on 6 November 2008, Mayor Johnson was asked if the NSC could be used as an Olympic training venue. He replied: “It would be wonderful if the Crystal Palace facility were to be used as a training facility in the run-up to 2012.

Greenwich Leisure Ltd, who I would certainly support that and manage the NSC, say it is available encourage that…” as a pre-training camp for the 2012 Page 20

Olympics and that national teams will be considering their preferred training venue within the next year.

The LDA have spent a reported £14 million, more than three times the original estimate, on new plant for the swimming, teaching and diving pools to keep the facility until the 2012 Olympics. Post-2012, the LDA propose to drain and board over the pools to convert the NSC into a ‘pavilion’ for 5-aside football and other dry sports.

To minimise the visual impact of this Grade II* 1960s structure in the new Park landscape, the LDA Masterplan proposes to bury the NSC in soil up to the first floor.

LORDS OF THE RINGS The Olympic Symbol of Blue, Yellow, Black, Green and Red interlocking rings signifies the unity of the five continents, but the colours do not correspond to a certain continent. London, the elected host city, will stage the 2012 Olympic Games from 27 July to 12 August and the Paralympics from 29 August until 9 September.

Those mainly responsible for the London 2012 Olympic Games are the IOC, DCMS, OAD, GOE, LCOG, GLA and LDA, all better known by their acronyms than their full titles, and their specific function and interaction could be found imprecise.

According to the Olympic Charter established by Pierre de Coubertin, the goal of the Olympic Movement is to contribute to building a peaceful and better world by educating youth through sport practised without discrimination of any kind and in the Olympic Spirit, which requires mutual understanding with a spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play.

There is little evidence of the commendable ideals of Pierre de Coubertin in modern Olympic Games; with professional ‘competitors’ receiving obscene amounts of money from huge salaries, sponsorship, prize-money, advertising and commercial endorsements, and a new Olympic event could be avoiding detection of using banned substances.

In a notable first, the CPCA, in the Summer 2007 Newsletter, conjectured on Olympic security

and possibility of the 2012 Olympic Games being handed back to the organisers and that perhaps the time had come for the Olympic Games to have a permanent home.

Since then, journalists and politicians have recognised this in statements and articles, amongst them Olympics Minister the Rt Hon Tessa Jowell MP, who said “had we known what we know now would we have bid for the Olympics?

Almost certainly not.” This surprising admission by Tessa Jowell, described by political commentators as the biggest gaffe of her political career, may also have been her most prophetic statement.

As with the greatly increased final costs of the Dome and Welsh and Scottish Parliament Buildings, an Olympic budget of £2.375 billion at the time of the 2005 successful London Olympic bid has now rocketed to £9.3 billion, and may finally exceed £20 billion, a stark warning given earlier by former London Delivery Authority Supremo, Jack Lemley.

One aspect of the forthcoming London Olympic Games that nobody wants to discuss is security, a political point made to good effect by Shadow Olympics Minister Hugh Robertson MP, the costs of which could dwarf some other costs and leave a legacy of debt for Londoners continuing indefinitely, despite hollow assurances by ex London Mayor Ken Livingstone: “Londoners will not pay a penny more than the

current 38p a week contribution on the counil tax to the Olympic Games. To get the Olympic Games for the price of a walnut whip a week is a bargain”.

Londoners have not been told for how long they will pay the ‘walnut whip’ levy and that based on the £9.3 billion current projections, final cost of the 2012 Olympics equates to £1,200 for every man and woman in London, a figure that could well double. Nigel Evans MP Conservative member of the Select Committee monitoring the Games warns: “There are too many Olympic bureaucrats who think they have a blank cheque”.

In November 2008, the illustrious International Olympic Committee visited London for discussions, post Beijing, on the practicalities of organising and staging the Olympics; the costs of four days of lectures, receptions, and official dinners, being shared between the IOC and the LOCOG (London Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games).

Although IOC President Jacques Rogge made oblique reference to global financial melt-down in saying “I am conscious that we come out of the enormous success of Beijing into difficult economic times...” this did not deter the IOC from bringing some 900 Olympic ‘stakeholders’ to London to partake in this junket.

The costs of security at the widely dispersed Olympic events venues, though likely to be astronomical, cannot suffer the ruthless savings being sought elsewhere. As was evident in Mumbai, fanatical terrorists can, by the indiscriminate slaughter of innocent people, paralyse a whole city, and the next Army Chief of General Staff, General Sir David Richards, said Olympic security uncertainties kept him awake at night.

Mike Warwick

Page 21

AMAZING GIRL GUIDES

Since its partial restoration in 1983 Crystal Palace Park’s maze has never really fulfilled its potential. A history of progressive neglect and vandalism results in a disappointing experience for the few who visit.

Now, however, Girlguiding UK has stepped in to save the ailing maze and create a permanent installation to mark the centenary of the establishment of the guiding movement in 2009.

The Girl Guide movement began in 1909 here at Crystal Palace Park when a small group of pioneering girls stopped Robert Baden-Powell at a boy scouts rally demanding that a girls’ movement be formed on similar lines. Persuaded by the enthusiasm of those girls, BadenPowell published a scheme for Girl Guides, which proved so popular that today it is the largest international voluntary organisation for girls and young women.

The Crystal Palace Park Maze project involves a partnership with several interested groups including Bromley Council and the LDA. An exhibition of the proposals was held at Kingswood

House Community Centre on 6 October 2008, to raise support needed from the community for the project to be eligible for funding from the Mayor’s ‘Priority Parks’ initiative.

The proposal is to renovate the existing maze, making it modern and interactive, using ideas developed through a community workshop.

The design will reflect the history of Girlguiding, link to the social history of the area and treat this historic feature with sensitivity and respect. To make the maze a safe and enjoyable amenity, the Guides have put forward The plans on display at Kingswood House the following proposals:• removal of the overgrown rhododendrons at the entrance opening up the area and creating access to the outer path and gnarled holly, whilst preserving the small population of the woodland orchid Broad-Leaved Helleborine; • re-instatement of two rows of Lombardy Poplars that were in the original 1870 maze plan; • reduction in the maze hedges to adult shoulder height; • creation of an interactive and engaging artwork trail game of 10

Children enjoying the new improvements where the reduced height of the hedging and the clearing of dense undergrowth gives the maze a sunny and safe feel.

Page 22

carved stones representing the Guide badge symbols, positioned at the ‘dead ends’ of the maze.

A central design, reproducing the maze as seen from above, will have these badges inlaid in cast bronze allowing visitors to try their skills at brass rubbing.

• a patterned plan of contrasting cut stone at the centre, surrounded by granite seating; • seeding a new meadow around the slopes of the maze to improve its topography and define its edge.

The CPCA applauds this sympathetic restoration of an historic feature of the Park for the enjoyment of the public. It is a proposal which aligns with the better aspects of the Park’s Masterplan, and shows how constructive significant changes can be achieved with relative ease, reasonable cost and sympathetic custodianship.

However, the important issue of maintenance and security is of concern; the new fencing has already been vandalised. Park rangers patrolling in vehicles are not sufficient deterrent. In other Bromley parks, patrols are on foot, with dogs. Without proper security, mindless vandals could destroy the hard work that is being put into this project. As Ken Livingstone said, before the first Mayoral election and at a time when he opposed commercial development on parkland: “Bring back the parkies”.

B AT S U N D E R T H R E AT The London Bat Group (LBG) has officially objected to the LDA Masterplan application. Acknowledged as the leading organisation on bat conservation, the statements of the LBG can be considered authoritative.

The LBG is the lead partner in the London Biodiveristy Partnership ‘Species Action Plan for Bats’ and is considered by the London Mayor, in The Mayor's Biodiversity Strategy, to be an appropriate consultee under Section 42(2)(e) of the Greater London Authority Act 1999.

Natterer's bat (Myotis nattereri) The Natterer’s Bat is a very light-phobic species, rare in London, and will almost certainly be lost should the LDA sell parkland at Rockhills for housing developments.

In a letter to Bromley Council the London Bat Group states: “Surveys have shown that Crystal Palace Park contains the most diverse range of bat species found in this part of London.

However, as these surveys have failed to identify and protect the features upon which the bats are dependent, there seems little virtue in undertaking them in the first place.

The destruction of these features will lead to a change in the local distribution and numbers of bats, and the loss of the more specialised bat species from the Park.

In some instances, proposals may be in breach of the Habitats Regulations if interfering with a feature that a colony is dependent on, in order to rear and nurture their young. This is easily done where there is such a poor appreciation of the effects of light pollution and the impact of the removal of established vegetation.

The London Bat Group would like to see evidence that the bat work has actually influenced the proposal and until such time, we oppose the plans.”

The Common Pipistrelle in flight, our smallest bat. to a design that ignores the requirements of bats, and mitigation is not possible within the proposed plan.

The granting of planning permission without the prior benefit of adequate protected species information risks legal challenge under the EIA Regulations (Regulation 3(2)), as was the case in the Regina v Cornwall County Council ex parte Jill Hardy ruling.

The LDA have clearly not provided the required level of information as indicated in the Bat Conservation Trust Survey Guidelines.

To learn more of these rare creatures visit: www.londonbats.org.uk

Councils are obliged to enhance the habitat of bats in planning applications. The London Bat Group states this application will cause harm and the loss of species, and that the survey failed to identify all features of importance.

Due to the regional importance of Crystal Palace Park, the impact on bat species will affect not only the Park but the greater 'local area' which means it will impact on Lewisham, Southwark, Lambeth and Croydon.

The Crystal Palace camping and caravan ground at Rockhills with mature trees and absence of light pollution, gives sanctuary to protected bat species.

There are occasions when ‘imperative reasons of overriding public interest’ can allow damage to a bat habitat (if mitigated), but in the case of the LDA Crystal Palace Park application the problems are due

Noctule bat (Nyctalus noctula) Noctule resting on tree.

Our largest bat with a wingspan up to 40cm or 17inches, the Noctule bat is not found in the borough of Bromley outside Crystal Palace Park - its last stronghold in the area.

Page 23

FROM OUR LOCAL COUNCILLORS Gipsy Hill Ward, Lambeth ASBESTOS AND THE SAFETY OF RESIDENTS During a Lambeth Council housing works programme in 2007, Jean Haley OBE, Chair of the Central Hill Residents’ Association, noted that the council was not properly monitoring the handling of asbestos.

Many post-war council houses contain asbestos, which is safe if undisturbed. However, builders were drilling and so there was a need for proper precautions.

Mrs Haley took the matter up with Gipsy Hill ward councillor Andrew Gibson. Together, they pressed for an explanation from council officers, but the council was unresponsive for months.

Finally, Mrs Haley and Cllr Gibson raised the matter with the Chief Executive of Lambeth Council at a public meeting in Christ Church, Gipsy Hill, and it was agreed to hold a special Council investigation.

At the time of going to press the investigation is continuing.

Already it seems that the Council’s procedures were inadequate and in any case were not followed properly. The borough is supposed to keep an “Asbestos Register”, which should be consulted when building work takes place. This seems to have happened only on a very patchy basis, and therefore this is an issue that is of considerable importance to all Lambeth Council residents.

If any residents feel they may have disturbed asbestos recently for example by drilling a wall please get in touch with Cllr Gibson and he will ask the Council to examine the facts as matter of urgency.

Cllr Andrew Gibson Gipsy Hill Ward agibson@lambeth.gov.uk tel 07748-736451 Page 24

College Ward, Southwark

THE PARK, POST OFFICE & GREEN CHAIN WALK Good News and Bad News for local residents - I will start with the Bad. Despite a campaign supported by hundreds of Dulwich and Lambeth residents, the Post Office at Gipsy Road has been closed under the Post Office’s “Network Change” programme initiated by the Government. There is a stark contrast (in my view) between this Government, which has presided over the closure of 9 Post Offices in Dulwich & West Norwood since 1997, and the work we have done to secure money to regenerate local shopping parades such as the Kingswood Estate.

The Good News is that the Kingswood Estate Shopping Parade is set to benefit from a £250,000 grant from the Big Lottery Fund to invest in a “Community Shop”.

Kingswood residents and College Councillors worked with the Crystal Palace Community Development Trust to secure this grant to refurbish two of the empty shop units and bring them back into use, providing access to much needed services on the estate.

This summer we attended the opening of the extension of the “Green Chain Walk” into Southwark. Thanks to backing from College Ward Councillors we have now joined the network, a series of green open spaces crossing Bromley, Bexley, Greenwich, Lewisham, and now linking into Dulwich and Nunhead. I have been nominated to represent Southwark on their committee and will keep you updated in the future on the local improvements this will bring.

Finally, as you are aware, in December last year Bromley’s Development Control committee were “minded to approve” the LDA's Masterplan for Crystal Palace Park. My colleague Cllr Michelle Holford has written to

the Secretary of State, Hazel Blears, asking her to call in the decision as we do not support the sale of parkland for housing.

If you wish to contact me about this, or any other College Ward issues, please e-mail me.

Cllr Lewis Robinson College Ward lewis.robinson@southwark.gov.uk

Upper Norwood Ward, Croydon

MORE TREES PLEASE! Trees are not just things of beauty, or nuisance to some; they contribute to our oxygen supply, lock-up carbon and are home to a vast number of animals, birds and insects, which I am sure everyone welcomes - especially in Upper Norwood.

To this end I invited local residents to a walkabout to see where trees might be planted or replanted, both in the street and in the local parks. Two residents eventually came out with me and we identified the Bedwardine Road area for street replanting, replacing trees that had been removed in the past. We also found areas around Upper Norwood Recreation Ground where mature trees had been felled, for whatever reason, and where there is adequate land for new ones to be planted. Mike Fisher, the Croydon Council Leader, has already supervised some tree planting in Upper Norwood recently. I hope I will be able to report more progress early in the New Year.

Cllr George Filbey Upper Norwood Ward george.filbey@croydon.gov.uk

Congratulations to Cllr Robert Askey, Upper Norwood Ward, on his election as Mayor of Croydon.

MEMBERSHIP Many thanks to those members who have renewed their subscriptions for 2008-09. There are still a number of you who have not renewed, and we urge you to do so as soon as you can.

Even better if you renew by standing order that would be a great help to us in reducing the administration time and costs of following up unrenewed subscriptions.

Just to remind you, our membership year runs from 1st March, so please use the form within this newsletter for your 2009-2010 subscription.

An organisation like the CPCA is reliant on the practical as well as financial support of its members, so we are grateful to those of you

who have completed the part of the application form in which we ask for various kinds of help/input into the working of the CPCA. Our apologies for having been slow to respond to your offers of help: we plan to follow this up as soon as possible. We welcome hearing from you by phone, email or letter and meeting you at our various events.

Although a little way off, another opportunity to participate is the AGM – an evening which includes news updates, a good buffet and a guest speaker in addition to the usual business.

Lastly, please do let us know if you change your email address.

Jo Bryant Membership Secretary

2009 AGM 7.30pm Thursday 14th May at the Goodliffe Hall, Christ Church Highland Road, off Gipsy Hill, London SE19 All members are warmly invited to come and meet the committee, hear reports and ask questions.

Business will include discussion on the Public Inquiry into the LDA Masterplan application for Crystal Palace Park.

Guest speaker to be announced later.

As always, delicious home-made refreshments will be provided.

CPCA Membership Form Rates Annual Subscription £8 Concessions £5 Optional contribution towards postage etc.

£ ...... £ ...... £ ......

Total £ ...... *cash/cheque/standing order

One subscription covers one household/family/business or voluntary group

Membership details I/we* wish to join/renew membership* of the CPCA. I/we* enclose my/our subscription/contribution of £…… for year beginning 1st March 20… (*Delete as appropriate) Please make cheques payable to CPCA or complete the standing order form overleaf Name (plus names of additional family members): ..….………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………Number of adults: …..... Number of children: ……....…

Name of business/group if applicable: ....……………………………………………………………………….…

Address: ...………………………………………………………………………………..………………..……......… ……………………………………………………………………………..………… Postcode: …….…..…….....…

Phone/fax: .……………………………………………………………………………………..…..…………....…...

Email: ………………………………………………….……………………………… Date: ………………......…

(Your email address enables us to keep you informed of local issues more quickly – please write clearly.) >>>>>>>>> continued >>>>>>>>> Page 25

K EEPING

UP TO DATE WITH THE

For the latest information on current CPCA activities, most recently concerning it's objection to the LDA Masterplan application and involvement in the forthcoming local inquiry, make sure to bookmark and be a regular visitor to our website: www.cpca.org.uk We've added a quick way to keep up to date with CPCA news and events from the website - an email digest that goes out every time the website is updated. It's free, and easy to access - just click on the email icon that's on every page and have the details and relevant links sent straight to your inbox. When you sign up you'll

CPCA

be sent an email to verify your subscription which will start as soon as you reply.

The same information is available via the orange RSS icons to those of you who like to receive updates in a your web browser or a feedreader.

Our website gallery now includes Bjarne Bladbjerg's latest colourful collection of restaurants, pubs and shop fronts from in and around the Triangle as it develops into a larger collection of images, both current and historical.

Submissions for the gallery are welcome for works in any medium that feature aspects of the Crystal Palace area.

WEBSITE

Don't forget our Events page has details on CPCA walks, quizzes, restaurant evenings and other local goings on. An online planning resource with guidelines on regulations and specific features is currently being assembled too.

Jeremy Walker Webmaster

If you care about the area, join the CPCA. Together, your voice counts.

Why not get involved? Please tick any activity you would like to take part in, or skills you can offer. (a) Helping to distribute newsletters [ (b) Writing an article for the newsletter [ (c) Giving a talk to members [ (d) Organising an event for members [ (e) Membership recruitment [ (f) Media experience [ (g) Publicity and public relations [ (h) Administrative/secretarial support [ (i) Researching information [

] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ]

(j) Fundraising (k) Becoming a committee member (l) Law (m) IT skills (hardware/software) (n) Journalism (o) Desktop publishing/graphics/design (p) Town planning (q) Web design/maintenance (r) Accountancy

[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [

] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ]

Other: …………………..………………………………………………………………………………………………..

To ensure that your membership is maintained you may prefer to pay by standing order through your bank. If so, please complete this form and return it to the CPCA at the address below.

Standing Order form Name/address of bank/building society:

Account Number: ……..………………….

……………………………………...........…

Sort Code: ………………………………...

……………………………………..........…

Signed: …………………………………...….

………………………………………..........

Date: ………………………………….....

Please pay the CPCA (Barclays Bank, Upper Norwood & Crystal Palace Branch, Sort Code 20-94-67, Account No. 50309486) the sum of £ …..… on 1st March each year until advised.

Membership details are kept on a database and not made available to any other party. If you prefer not be included, please tick the box [ ]

Please return this form with your subscription to CPCA: 10 Jasper Road London SE19 1SJ Tel/Fax: 020 8670 4395 email: cpca@onetel.com website: www.cpca.org.uk Member of the London Forum of Amenity & Civic Societies & The Open Spaces Society Registered Charity No. 261790

Page 26

READING FOR LIFE

A LIFE-SAVING MESSAGE FROM THE AMBULANCE SERVICE We all carry our mobile phones with names and numbers stored in its memory, but should we be involved in an accident, or were taken ill, how would those attending us know who to call. Which of the hundreds of numbers stored is the contact person in case of emergency?

HENCE THE 'ICE' CAMPAIGN (IN CASE OF EMERGENCY).

If the number of a ‘contact in the event of emergency’ is stored under the name ICE, emergency service personnel and hospital staff would be able to contact the right person quickly simply by dialling the ICE number.

The idea came from a paramedic who found that, at the scene of an accident, the patient usually had a mobile phone, but the emergency crew

had no way of knowing which was the best number to call.

He thought this problem could be solved if there was a nationally recognised entry in the contact names list.

For more than one contact name simply enter ICE1, ICE2, ICE3 etc.

It really could save your life, or put a loved one's mind at rest.

The scheme has backing from the Welsh ambulance service and Welsh assembly who believe it could help at a time when every second counts, and spending time trying to contact the next of kin can delay the start of treatment.

“It is a case of helping people in distress and getting the best and most correct information about a patient, and the best use out of a mobile phone.”

Falklands war veteran Simon Weston (For more visit the website of the BBC News ICE campaign)

There seem to be even more babies and toddlers than usual around the Triangle – the usual stay-and-play sessions and push-chair friendly cafes are packed. The half-hour Waggle and Hum baby sing-along session at 10.00 on Thursday mornings at the unique Upper Norwood Library were regularly attracting 40 babies, so Fiona, our highly gifted Children’s Librarian, doubled it up: there is now a 9.30 and an 11.00 session.

The only thing is, attendance at the 11.00 session is now approaching 50 babies! Fiona certainly has ‘Old MacDonald’ cred with the under 3s.

What better way could there be to introduce our burgeoning new generation to being amidst books in a library, sitting in a circle and focusing on a presentation, not to mention the music and the language skills they gain from the repetition in nursery rhymes. Fortunately, there is the upstairs reading room for those library users who don’t want to join in the odd chorus of ‘Jelly on a Plate’ or ‘Six Seagulls Sat on a Chimney Pot’ (no, we didn’t know that one either). Lay on more sessions, we say! Library users: catch ‘em young and you’ve got ‘em for life.

Rachel Ward

CRYSTAL PALACE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION President Audrey Hammond

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OFFICERS Chairman John Payne Vice Chairman & Planning Don Bianco Hon Secretary Suzanne Elkin Hon Treasurer Ramesh Morjaria Membership Jo Bryant Webdesign Jeremy Walker Events Katriona Ogilvy-Webb Planning Pam Gray, Joe Figueira, Jon & Eileen Digby-Rogers Graphics Mike Conrad Research Dr Rachel Ward

CPCA 10 Jasper Road, Upper Norwood, London SE19 1SJ tel/fax: 020 8670 4395 e: cpca@onetel.com or info@cpca.org.uk www.cpca.org.uk Registered Charity No. 261790 Member of the London Forum of Amenity & Civic Societies and Open Spaces Society Page 27

UPPER NORWOOD JOINT LIBRARY ACTIVITIES GO FROM STRENGTH TO STRENGTH The National Year of Reading 2008 has given the library the publicity it needed to make local residents more aware that it is a fantastic place to visit, not just for the traditional services found in a library, but for a range of additional services for the community as a whole.

Starting in April 2008 the library has had a very busy schedule of events including a Healthy Living Fair, an International Festival, a Local History Festival, a new promotion called Crystal Palace ‘Park and Read’ and a Frost Fest in November. This programme aimed to increase reading and encourage wider use of library services by bringing books to life.

Christmas in the Library In December the library was transformed into a ‘Christmas of the Future Wonderland’. Children met futuristic characters, including Darth Vadar, Arbie the Robot and a real Dalek, visited Santa’s Grotto, met author Alex Milway and learned how to draw mice, took part in a Jacqueline Wilson Book Challenge and were awarded prizes for the Horrid Henry drawing competition. Teenagers and adults learned how to create a Manga graphic novel with author Al Davison and the whole family

booed and hissed during the pantomime Aladdin – the first one ever to be staged at the UNJL!

Spring 2009 events January and February saw us celebrate National Storytelling Week which included many lighthearted activities with the irrepressible Fiona, our very proactive children’s librarian. Jack Russell gave an evocative talk about his memories of the Second World War and local puppeteer Drew Colby captivated his audience with the story of TomTit-Tot, the English version of Rumplestiltskin.

In March we will be celebrating World Book Day with the first ever ‘Crystal Palace Authors Month’. This will be both a celebration of every published author in the Crystal Palace area and a means of encouraging new local writers to ‘pick up their pen’.

Published local authors are invited to contact the Chief Librarian to discuss the event in more detail. For the latest details of library events visit: www.uppernorwoodlibrary.org or link to it via the CPCA website.

Bradley Millington Chief Librarian

LIBRARY EFFICIENCY GOES UNREWARDED SAYS UNLC All who attended the library’s special events in 2008, including those based around ‘History’ and ‘Park and Read’, will be even more aware of the high quality of our library and the true dedication of the staff who serve the community.

These achievements are acknowledged by the Upper Norwood Library Joint Committee (the ‘management committee’ of Lambeth & Croydon councillors) but not sufficient to provide the extra funding desperately required.

Croydon and Lambeth councillors have stated categorically that the Library will not close (the councils know that if it did, the protests would be deafening) but we know that resources are stretched and the library continues to be under-staffed and under-funded.

A national Museums Libraries Archives (MLA) report, ‘Fact not Fiction 2008’, states that Croydon Council spends £22,922 per 1,000 population on its library service, and Lambeth £20,967. Figures for Upper Norwood Joint Library are £13,142 per 1,000, demonstrating this library’s efficiency to survive

Crystal Palace Norwood Heights written by Brian Dann and Audrey Hammond, designed by Mike Conrad.

Obtainable from the CPCA 020 8670 4395 cpca@onetel.com

and our local bookshops Page 28

Author Alex Wheatle with the winner of the ‘Dirty South’ competition, part of the ‘Park & Read’ event, with cash prizes provided by the UNLC.

IN MEMORIAM

Gunnvor Stallybrass 30 April 1926 – 5 December 2008

Julie Myerson, author of ‘Something might happen’, another ‘Park & Read’ choice, talked about her work and met library users at an evening event.

on so much less income. The local media warn that there are to be ‘behind the scenes’ cuts to libraries, parks and sports in Lambeth, to try to reduce a projected budget overspend.

With flat-lined and unequal funding from the two boroughs and reluctance from other nearby boroughs to contribute, even though their residents make use of the service, other sources of support have to be considered.

Not all these suggestions gain public acceptance: for example, the planning application for residential development on the site adjacent to Beardell Street, would allegedly have provided extra library-useable space, but no additional funding, in exchange for the loss of some of the library car park. This was subsequently withdrawn and, like aspects of the Crystal Palace Park planning application, was an example of unacceptable selling of assets for a quick fix, ignoring the long-term community harm.

Upper Norwood Library meanwhile, through careful planning and sheer hard work, continues to provide a beacon service on a low static budget.

Don’t be misled by appearances – the library desperately needs more funding to provide a full service – and through the failings of the Joint Committee, there has been no increase from the parent boroughs.

Pam Gray Hon Secretary, Upper Norwood Library Campaign (UNLC)

Gunnvor Stallybrass – a CPCA member since day one, died after months of illness on 5 December last year. We send deepest sympathy to her daughter Anne and son Michael and her five granddaughters who were her pride and joy.

In the last few years Gunnvor had suffered with ill health, but those who recall the early days of CPCA will remember her enormous energy and good humour and hospitality. In fact she and her late husband Oliver were the Arts Activities of the Triangle.

From the start they were tremendous supporters of regeneration of the Triangle with the creation of an Arts Centre at the heart of it.

In their beautiful big house overlooking the Park they welcomed members to literally hundreds of events, such as we would have liked to see happen in a Centre: monthly play and poetry readings, socials, chess, recitals, concerts (once there was an orchestra of 22 and an audience of 120 – some sitting up the stairs), and the renowned Kaleidoscopes where members provided their own entertainment, compered by Brian Dann.

Gunnvor had a lovely voice and took part many times but will be remembered especially

for her organising genius with the refreshments! Usually people contributed a dish to the feast but at least once (on the occasion of an evening of Music Hall) she provided a delicious meal for 80 people! And yes, we had 80 members attending events in those days!

Gunnvor was Norwegian and first met Oliver when he parachuted with Allied Forces into Norway near the end of the war. Along with Nordic hospitality came her Nordic sense of style and design and members will recall the beautiful home she made for Oliver and their children, created not only with imagination and flair but with great practicality – I remember once finding her busy with saws and timber making secondary glazing for the huge upstairs windows and of course she did all the decorating herself.

Later, when on her own and not so mobile, she wrote hundreds of letters to everyone from the Prime Minister down (or should I say up…?) – her enthusiasm and love for the area and the Park knew no bounds.

Gunnvor was a wonderful campaigner and an invaluable member of the local community and our association. She will be greatly missed by all who knew her.

Audrey Hammond

PLEASE JOIN THE L I B R A RY C A M PA I G N The Upper Norwood Library Campaign urges you, your friends and neighbours to join us. Membership forms are available in the Library where you can sign up immediately or write to: The Secretary, UNLC, 5 Becondale Road, London SE19 1QJ Membership is £3 p.a. (£1.50 retired/unwaged) Page 29

Book reviews

Three local history books

by Beryl Cheeseman Treetops & Terraces: a bygone era of New Town, Upper Norwood, SE19 (Theban, 1991, ISBN 0951880306) Treetops & Terraces: “And the walls came a-tumbling down” (Theban, 1994, ISBN 0951880314) Upper Norwood Triangle Memories (Theban, 2007, ISBN 9780951880326) Beryl Cheeseman’s two Treetops & Terraces books focus on what is perhaps for many people an unfamiliar part of our local history. Today’s London street atlases show, just on the south side of Central Hill, Norwood New Town (the Oxford Road area).

This ‘new town’ in fact dates back to about 1850 and became a distinct community within the wider district of Norwood. Beryl explains that she is descended from four generations who lived there.

A popular view held locally is that New Town was built to house labourers who came to build the Crystal Palace (1852-4). Beryl rejects this however, pointing out that the development had begun slightly earlier, with most of the building carried out after those years.

An odd reflection on the social attitudes of an earlier age was the building of walls round New Town.

The residents were not well off and had something of a reputation for drunkenness and fighting. It is Page 30

believed that local builders, concerned to sell more expensive properties in the district, felt it was best to segregate this working class enclave. What resulted was a closely-knit community where there was real poverty but at the same time a sense of commitment to one’s neighbours: “If a helping hand was needed, it was always there.”

Many aspects of everyday life are described by Beryl. She emphasises the happiness of people’s lives in spite of often difficult conditions: coping with leaking house roofs for example, and children walking around Norwood before school, hoping to find a baker’s shop willing to give away stale bread or buns from the day before.

We learn of the good works amongst the residents of two missions based within New Town, one Nonconformist and one Church of England. Beryl also tells us of the nearby Cottage Hospital, Rockmount School, St Margaret’s Church, and the opening of Harold Road Recreation ground in 1890.

In the second Treetops & Terraces book we move on to the later period, from around 1930, which saw the removal of the surrounding walls, through to the late 1960s which was a period of major redevelopment. This saw the end of what had been the most important of the three pubs to have served local residents, the Oxford Arms. Again in this second book we are aware of the less than ideal conditions in New Town, with even a small house being shared by two families, but always there remained that strong sense of community. Beryl tells us much about individual families and includes many others in lists.

In Upper Norwood Triangle Memories, Beryl focuses on the main shopping area of Upper

Norwood: the Triangle. She tells us of the shops and the characters who worked there, the pubs, the post office, the churches, the Salvation Army whose work she highly praises, dances at the Royal Crystal Palace Hotel, and all that made up the pleasant, villagey feel of the district. I particularly noticed the huge level of staffing at the old police station near the top of Gipsy Hill (before the present building in Central Hill).

There were two inspectors, eight sergeants, and fifty nine constables, plus one horse to be ridden by two inspectors on alternating duty. Other police horses were stabled in the sidings behind Gipsy Hill railway station.

All three of these books will be enjoyed by those with an interest in the history, especially the social history, of our area.

Just a little footnote illustrating Beryl’s encyclopaedic knowledge of New Town families. Some years ago I was in conversation with a man in the Alma pub in Addiscombe. He told me he had grown up in Norwood New Town. When I later mentioned his name to Beryl she quickly provided some detailed family history for him, including his father in a group photo of people about to set out on a community coach outing. My friend at the Alma was delighted with what Beryl had found, and asked if there might be anything about his employer, who was also from New Town. Beryl promptly came up with lots of family information for the employer as well. To say I was astounded is putting it mildly.

Jerry Savage Local History Librarian, Upper Norwood Library Note: The first of these books is out of print, but the second two are available from the Norwood Society: contact Anna Lines linesamw@btinternet.com or tel. 020 8653 8768.

All three books can be borrowed from Upper Norwood Library.

CPCA member and passionate motorcyclist, Dave Gurman, has now published his ‘Carin’ Sharin’ Chronicles’, a compilation of his contributions to the now well known Rider’s Digest motorcycle magazine, of which he is editor and co owner.

However the ‘Chronicles’ are not just for the motorcycle cognoscenti.

Dave’s wit, incisive thinking and philosophical approach to life make for a fascinating and amusing read that will appeal to those who enjoy a slightly nonconformist approach to life. A book that won’t let you put it down – highly recommended.

John Payne ISBN 978-0-9560863-0-3 Price £5.99

Julie Myerson’s 2003 novel, Something Might Happen, is generally thought to be her best work to date. Set in a small seaside town in Suffolk, it could be regarded as crime fiction at first glance. However, once a shockingly brutal murder has taken place at the beginning of the book, it becomes something very different.

Rather than examining the detective and forensic elements, Myerson chooses to concentrate on the effects of the killing on two families – that of the deceased and of her best friend, Tess.

She shows, frighteningly, how easily lightning can strike from a seemingly blue sky, causing devastation, chaos and changing lives forever at a stroke.

Selected as the featured book for the first ever ‘Crystal Palace Park and Read’ event at the end of 2008, I felt that this novel captured perfectly, the uncertainties and feelings of precariousness which hover just below the surface of life in the modern age.

Although challenging and unsettling, Myerson’s book is gripping and compelling and very much a product of the ‘Nervous Noughties’.

Speaking during her visit to the Upper Norwood Joint Library last year, Julie Myerson said that one of the ways in which she confronts her own fears is to write about them. Perhaps that is why this book seems so true to life and makes such a lasting impression.

Dave signing a copy of his book which he very kindly donated as a Quiz Night raffle prize, November 2008.

Bradley Millington Chief Librarin, UNJL ISBN 9780099453529

The appreciation of CPCA members of our native wildlife was amply demonstrated at our 2007 AGM by the enthusiastic response to Trevor Williams talk, about his work as director of Fox Project.

Many questions were raised as to how best to care for injured wildlife – from prickly hedgehogs to our feathered friends. Now more help is at hand in the form of an excellent book entitled ‘Wildlife Rescue’.

Written by Angela Wilkes, Chairman of the Dulwich Society Wildlife committee, this encyclopaedic book has everything you need to know on the care and management of our native wildlife.

As a volunteer animal rescuer myself, I refer to its elucidatory pages on a regular basis.

This practical and enlightening book is a great way of involving the whole family in wildlife rescue and care, and is a must for the bookshelves of those who need advice or information on the wild animals living around and amongst us.

John Payne ISBN 978-1-87409-289-6 Price £15.95

All the books mentioned are available from our local bookshops:

Bookseller Crow on the Hill 50 Westow Street SE19 3AF 020 8771 8831 info@Booksellercrow.com,

Kirkdale Books 272 Kirkdale, Sydenham SE26 4RS 020 8778 4701 kirkdalebookshop@hotmail.com

Village Books 1d Calton Avenue, Dulwich Village SE21 7DE 020 8693 2808

and Amazon.co.uk Page 31

Local Councillors: BROMLEY Bromley Council, Bromley Civic Centre, Stockwell Close, Bromley BR1 3UH tel: 020 8464 3333 Crystal John Canvin 020 8402 0103 Palace john.canvin@bromley.gov.uk Ward: Tom Papworth c/o Bromley Council 020 8464 3333 tom.papworth@bromley.gov.uk CROYDON Croydon Council, Taberner House, Park Lane, Croydon, CR9 3JS tel: 020 8726 6000 Upper Mayor Robert Askey c/o Norwood Croydon Council 020 8686 4433 Ward: robert.askey@croydon.gov.uk George Filbey 07940 012 843 george.filbey@croydon.gov.uk Pat Ryan 020 8405 6739 pat.ryan@croydon.gov.uk LAMBETH Lambeth Council, Town Hall, Brixton Hill, London SW2 1RW tel: 020 7926 1000 Gipsy Andrew Gibson 07748 736 451 Hill agibson@lambeth.gov.uk Ward: Suzanne Poole 07946 218 965 spoole@lambeth.gov.uk Graham Pycock c/o Lambeth Council 020 7926 1000 gpycock@lambeth.gov.uk SOUTHWARK Southwark Council, Town Hall, Peckham Road, London SE5 8UB tel: 020 7525 5000 College Michelle Holford 07903 968 519 / Ward: 020 8637 9656 michelle.holford@southwark.gov.uk Kim Humphreys 07711 823 197 / 020 7525 7504 kim.humpreys@southwark.gov.uk Lewis Robinson 07815 208 066 lewis.robinson@southwark.gov.uk LEWISHAM Lewisham Council, Town Hall, Catford, London SE6 4RU tel: 020 8314 3308 Sydenham Chris Best 020 8659 6445 Ward: cllr_chris.best@lewisham.gov.uk Seamus McDermott 020 8659 8497 cllr_seamus.mcdermott@lewisham.gov.uk Marion Nesbit 020 8693 7816 cllr_marion.nesbit@lewisham.gov.uk

Local MPs: The House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA House of Commons switchboard: 020 7219 3000 Croydon North: Rt Hon Malcolm Wicks wicksm@parliament.uk Croydon Central: Andrew Pelling pellinga@parliament.uk Beckenham: Jacqui Lait laitj@parliament.uk Dulwich & West Norwood: Rt Hon Tessa Jowell jowellt@parliament.uk Lewisham West: Jim Dowd dowdj@parliament.uk Page 32

Contact details Greater London Assembly write to: GLA , City Hall The Queen’s Walk, London SE1 2AA London Mayor Boris Johnson mayor@london.gov.uk 020 7983 4100 London Assembly members: Green Party Londonwide: Darren Johnson darren.johnson@london.gov.uk 020 7983 4411 Lambeth & Southwark: Valerie Shawcross, valerie.shawcross@london.gov.uk 020 7983 4401 Greenwich & Lewisham: Len Duvall len.duvall@london.gov.uk 020 7983 4517 Croydon & Sutton: Steve O’Connell steve.o’connell@london.gov.uk 020 7983 4353 Bexley & Bromley: James Cleverly james.cleverly@london.gov.uk 020 7983 6571

Local Press South London Press: 2/4 Leigham Court Road, Streatham, SW16 2PD Editor - Hannah Walker 020 8710 6506 hannah.walker@slp.co.uk Croydon Advertiser: Jessop House, 100 Tamworth Road, Croydon CR0 1XX Newsdesk 020 8760 7601 newsdesk@croydonadvertiser.co.uk News Editor Jo Wadsworth 020 8760 7619 jo.wadsworth@essnmedia.co.uk Upper Norwood reporter: Ross Lidbetter 020 8760 7613 ross.lidbetter@essnmedia.co.uk Bromley News Shopper Mega House, Crest View Drive, Petts Wood, BR5 1BT 01689 836 211 newsroom@london.newsquest.co.uk Bromley Times Kentish Times Newspapers, Roxby House, Station Road, Sidcup, DA15 7EJ newsdesk 020 8269 7009 kate.mead@archant.co.uk The Croydon Advertiser and Croydon Post Advertiser House, 19 Bartlett Street, South Croydon CR2 6TB 020 8763 6666 edit@croydonadvertiser.co.uk Croydon Guardian, Streatham, West Norwood, & Crystal Palace Guardian, & Dulwich Guardian The Editor, 819 London Road, North Cheam, Surrey, SM3 9BN 020 8329 9244 newsdesk@london.newsquest.co.uk For information on MPs, Councillors, London Assembly members and Euro MPs visit www.TheyWorkForYou.com and www.WriteToThem.com (Note: an MP will only deal with issues raised by their own constituents.)

FA R E S U P, S E RV I C E S D OW N Train services from Crystal Palace station have been struck a terrible blow recently. The Southern Rail timetable introduced in December has halved our services to West Croydon, cut off our only direct link with East Croydon, halved our services to Tulse Hill and lost us two trains an hour to London Bridge. And this in a context in which fares have just risen to new astronomical levels.

As any frequent rail-user knows, to be sure of getting somewhere on time, one must allow for: 1. the service you want being cancelled; 2. the next one being delayed and 3. (just to keep us on our toes) the occasional train that leaves earlier than it should!

While none of this is acceptable, it is unfortunately the reality, and in the case of services which run frequently one can, reluctantly, work around it. However, in the case of half-hourly services (which our Croydon and Tulse Hill services now are) prone to cancellations and delays, those services become unfeasible.

Croydon is the largest commercial centre close to Crystal Palace, the nearest source of good shopping and potential work. But the one token East Croydon train left running at 8.45 is not much use if you start work at 10am. Travelling anywhere by bus at peak hours is also very unpredictable, so effectively our links with Croydon as a feasible place to work have been cut. And the loss of our direct connection to East Croydon Advertisement

Need help with our website?

Need information about travelling by train?

Just ‘Ask Lisa’ , our new virtual assistant. www.nationalrail.co.uk/contact

makes travelling to Gatwick airport, and Brighton and the south coast much more complicated.

The loss in the other direction is devastating also. It has halved our service to Tulse Hill - our connection with Thameslink (a previous sad loss from Crystal Palace) and the City, Kings Cross/ St Pancras and beyond. It loses us two trains an hour to London Bridge – and also means that the London Bridge trains now run alternately from platforms 1 and 4, which are so far apart that if your train is delayed, you don’t know if it’s worth making the dash over to the other platform in the (forlorn) hope that that train might be running on time. These stampedes of panic-stricken commuters might be regarded as funny, if it were not so miserable being one.

“We’re getting there” ? !

Yes – late, overcharged, crowded, miserable and angry as hell.

Norwood Rail Users’ Group, which campaigns for improved rail services from Tulse Hill, West Norwood and Gipsy Hill, held a public meeting with Southern Rail to protest against the loss of services, but the complaints voiced were largely ignored.

If you’d like to add yours, contact your MP, councillors, the local press and the addresses below.

According to transport watchdog London TravelWatch, our services were axed in order to increase off-peak services on the Redhill line. To provide the necessary train crew and paths for the new trains through the Croydon area, Southern Rail said they needed to withdraw the London Bridge - Smitham via Crystal Palace and East Croydon trains, few of which, they claimed, were carrying more than about 50 passengers at any point. They say that the new Redhill trains are carrying substantially more passengers than the trains which they have withdrawn.

In the context in which it is for the greater good to reduce travel by car, encourage orbital rather than radial transport, encourage people to work closer to home, reduce the strain on commuter services into central London – and of course regenerate our local area – we need improvement and expansion of rail services, not the opposite.

TravelWatch accepted Southern’s argument that their scheme could not be achieved without the loss of the Smitham trains, but, in apparent contradiction, say that in future timetable reviews they will press for their reinstatement.

Suggestions just might include a last train from Victoria to Crystal Palace later than 23.37, which would mean that an evening’s entertainment in the West End would not have to be cut short at 11pm. And perhaps a ticket office that keeps to its advertised opening hours. Too much to ask in the 21st century?

Southern Railway: Southern Customer Services, POBox 277, Tonbridge TN9 2ZP 08451 272920 comments@southernrailway.com

Kalina Palka

London Travel Watch: 6 Middle Street, London EC1A 7JA enquiries@londontravelwatch.org. uk 020 7505 9000 Norwood Rail Users Group www.nrug.org.uk Page 33

TFL CRYSTAL PALACE STATION EXHIBITION The exhibition plans made no reference to the proposed Tramlink extension to Crystal Palace.

Crystal Palace low level station was constructed between 1854 and 1875 by the London Brighton and South Coast Railway. Banister and Gough were attributed as architect and engineer. Prior to 2001, the building was largely unoccupied and was, for years, on the English Heritage Register of Buildings at Risk. The wonderful twin arched roof of the train shed was dismantled around 1905 following a fire.

The station was listed as Grade II in June 1973 and refurbished in 2001 to include replacement of the timber roof over the old booking hall by a metal structure in a similar style. A porte cochère (canopy), although less impressive than the original, was built outside the booking hall entrance.

TfL’s proposals to refurbish the station, on which the public were invited to comment, were broadly welcomed at its exhibition on 25 September 2008.

TfL states that rebuilding proposals have been developed in consultation with the Railway Heritage Trust, English Heritage and Bromley, to ensure they pay due regard to the historical importance of Crystal Palace station while providing modern railway facilities to meet passenger needs.

The key features are: • a refurbished booking hall, located in its original position within the Victorian station building to enhance access to services, although controversially, the historic wooden ticket hall will be removed; • the removal of the 1970s glass structure which houses the current ticket hall to improve the overall appearance of the station; • upgraded facilities, including real time information displays, better lighting, CCTV and improved signage to enhance station ambience, and the installation of ticket gates to facilitate the introduction of Oyster pay as you go, which the London Mayor has promised to extend to the London overground rail network; • a new staircase giving direct access to platforms 1,2 and 3, and three long-overdue new lifts providing stepfree access to all platforms; • a canopy over platforms 3,4,5 and 6 to give protection from the weather.

Subject to Listed Building Consent being granted by Bromley, the works could start as early as Spring 2009 with the new ticket office opening when new London overground services start in 2010.

Page 34

There are alternatives methods, costing less than £170 million, to take people up Anerley Hill. This travellator in Bilbao, Spain, shows how it could be done.

EAST LONDON LINE The East London Line phase 1 extension is now underway. Services will be extended north to Highbury & Islington and south to New Cross, Brockley, Honor Oak Park, Forest Hill, Sydenham, Crystal Palace, Penge West, Anerley, Norwood Junction and West Croydon, in time for the 2012 Olympics ... most welcome, but not at the expense of existing services.

NO FUNDING FOR TRAMLINK At City Hall on 6 November 2008 London Mayor Boris Johnson revealed that a number of transport schemes throughout London would not proceed.

Among these was the proposed Tramlink extension to Crystal Palace. Mayor Johnson said: “In stopping this expenditure I’m not stopping the schemes, I’m simply stopping the deception; the artificial deception of keeping hopes alive when there is no funding for these schemes.”

Later that day at People’s Question Time at Bromley Civic Centre, the Mayor was asked about the abandonment of the Tramlink extension. He said: “This isn’t a project that has been abandoned or scrapped or axed by me, that’s not what has happened. I’m afraid the funding for this project was not there and I thought it was better to be up front. I could have gone on with the rigmarole and the charade of pretending that this was something that we were going to deliver in due course… To do that involves wasting millions and millions of pounds on consultants and planners and titivators of drawings that in the end, that money could be used on projects that will take forward transport improvements in London. It is a tough decision to take, to stop those consultants and planners getting on with their work, but I think it is the right thing to do and it doesn’t mean the idea is completely dead; it means that we can revisit it if and when the government give us the wherewithal to do so. I just thought it was better to be straight up with London and tell them exactly what the reality was rather than continuing with the pretence. We haven’t stopped the scheme, we’ve stopped the pretence.”

Whilst some may be disappointed, others will be pleased that the £170 million extension (formerly estimated at £70 million) will no longer be carving 9-metre wide tram tracks through public parkland and using a major part of the hilltop as a tram terminus.

Perhaps common sense will now prevail and consideration be given to a direct bus link from Crystal Palace to existing tram stops and local district centres.

Although Mayor Johnson has, for the moment, halted proceedings due to lack of available finance, a planning condition keeps this area available to TfL for 10 years.

The condition states: “The Developer agrees to safeguard the area shaded pink on Plan 5 [Anerley Hill edge] for the proposed Croydon Tramlink Extension. The Developer agrees that for a period of 10 years from the date of the Agreement, no buildings or other permanent structures shall be constructed that would prevent the carrying out of works in respect of the Croydon Tramlink Extension.”

NEWS FROM TFL In December 2008, TfL provided the CPCA with the following update: “Transport for London recently published their Business Plan for 2009/10 – 2017/18. While the level and certainty of TfL’s funding has improved with a £39 billion 10year settlement with Government, challenging economic times create constraints and the previous Mayor’s promised projects, which never had any money set aside for them, mean that tough choices have to be made over what TfL can fund.

The Tramlink extension to Crystal Palace previously had money allocated up till 2010 for development but there is no funding for implementation. The Mayor has decided that this expenditure should be directed to projects that are both fully funded, and will make a real difference to London. This means that tram schemes with much merit, such as the Tramlink extension to Crystal Palace will have to be re-assessed.

Part of Crystal Palace Park will be kept available for the Tram for the next 10 years

TfL has committed to conduct a wider study to consider the transport needs of this part of Outer London. This will include an assessment of the longer-term role of Tramlink and potential enhancements to the network.

A recommendation from this study will form part of a future funding bid to Government.

The Croydon Tramlink Extension has “no funding for implementation. The Mayor has decided that this expenditure should be directed to projects that are both fully funded, and will make a real difference to London.

There are a number of projects in the Business Plan to improve transport links in the area including: • the East London Line Extension Phase 1 to West Croydon and Crystal Palace • an increase in the frequency of the x26 orbital bus link will also improve bus services to the area.

• TfL is paying for Oyster validation equipment to be provided at all London rail stations in zones 1-6 and is aiming to ensure that Oyster pay-as-yougo will be available on all train services in London by late 2009.”

Esme Yuill Communications & Consultation Officer, Planning Communications Transport for London Page 35

Views

TRIANGLE SAFETY

NEW DISTRICT CENTRE MANAGER We welcome Nadia Jones as the new Upper Norwood District Centre Manager, under the auspices of Croydon Enterprise.

Her office will be used as a ‘dropin’ surgery over the next few weeks with various specialists from the Croydon Enterprise programme giving one-to-one advice and ‘pre-start’ information.

Nadia is closely involved with the Crystal Palace Festival around the Triangle.

For more information visit her at: 18 Church Road SE19 2ET or phone: 020 8090 5575/07776 477366

SEFGROVE’S PHARMACY Happy to Help You Mr Patel of Sefgroves Pharmacy Westow Hill will take and collect your prescriptions to or from your Doctor’s surgery.

Ring him on 020 8670 5198 for this free service.

Crossing Church Road can be very hazardous, as recent accidents have shown. Anyone living or visiting shops in Church Road will know just how fast traffic can sometimes propel itself. Bikers can sometimes be seen ‘wheelying’ on their back wheels, clocking up to twice the legal speed limit past the Bingo Hall.

At the Church Road/Westow Street junction, it has been well noted how crossing the short twoway stretch confuses pedestrians.

My aim is to see at least one pedestrian controlled crossing in Church Road if not the three I would prefer. This is supported by the CPCA, the local Chamber of Commerce, and a number of local residents to whom I have spoken.

I am negotiating with the Leader of Croydon Council to see when we can expect at least one crossing and perhaps even funding for three. Unfortunately three authorities are involved Croydon,

Bromley and TfL. The process therefore might take a bit longer than anticipated! Meantime, it hoped no one dies or anyone else is seriously injured.

Cllr George Filbey Editors Note: The CPCA supports Cllr Filbey’s campaign. But it is not just Church Road that has a problem with pedestrian safety. As we have raised many times with Croydon, Lambeth and TfL, all three roads of the Triangle, especially the junctions, present the potential for serious accidents.

TfL have publicly stated that traffic movement takes precedence and hence there are no pedestrian crossing points on Church Road, or at the north/south Gipsy Hill/Central Hill crossroads.

It is also well known that the traffic lights at the complex crossroads Westow Hill/Crystal Palace Parade are of set sequence and do not respond to the placebo pedestrian controls.

the crystal palace agent

Property Investment Land New Developments Valuers Residential Sales Residential Lettings Property Management 12 Westow Street, Upper Norwood London SE19 3AH Tel: 020 8653 4444 Fax: 020 8653 9465 www.coopergiles.com Page 36

Let us have your views on Crystal Palace Park, the Triangle, or planning issues that affect you.

Call the CPCA on 020 8670 4395 email: cpca@onetel.com or write to CPCA c/o 10 Jasper Road, Upper Norwood, London SE19 1SJ

POLICING THE

The Triangle Team continues to operate from our base at 19 Central Hill. The office now sports a nice new sign above the door. One minor problem - it states ‘Crystal Palace Triangle Ward’. Obviously the title is slightly incorrect as there is no such ward, but it is coupled with a Metropolitan Police logo.

In the summer, officers from the team took 25 young people from around the Triangle and Thornton Heath on an army outreach day.

The officers joined the young people in completing an assault course, team building exercises and cooking their own lunches using army ration packs. The officers enjoyed the day almost as much as the young people.

We continue to work closely with the Crystal Palace, Gipsy Hill and Upper Norwood Ward officers.

From our point of view crime in the area is still reduced compared to previous years. The fun fair and

fireworks have just passed, both without any incident. We assisted the Crystal Palace Team and our colleagues in Bromley with the policing of both events.

We have held a number of ‘street briefings’ during the summer. Basically, we leaflet a street saying that officers from the team will be there at a particular time and date in the near future.

We then attend and discuss problems with residents, particular to that location. These have proved fruitful for us as we can address problems that no one had otherwise told us about.

When you see us on foot, please do not hesitate to speak to us about any problems. We will do our best to answer any queries you may have.

Please remember to let us know about any suspicious incidents or people. Always remember to dial 999 if there is a crime in progress or you think an immediate response is required.

Please note these telephone numbers for future reference:

Triangle Team: 020 8721-2906 Safer Neighbourhood Teams: Crystal Palace: 020 8721-2604 Gipsy Hill: 020 8721-2617 Upper Norwood: 020 8721-2478

THE GOODLIFFE HALL PROJECT This year the Goodliffe Hall project has had a series of successful results.

Planning permission has been granted and Lambeth has supported the use of the Hall in ‘Third Sector’ (voluntary organisations) provision.

Lambeth are now funding the Gilfillan Partnership to continue our grant seeking process. We are now in a position to move forward when the money is found.

Work in the Hall continues and progress has been made with developments for the youth in particular. Our summer scheme for local youth was a great success and the employment of youth workers for both Church and community based activities has resulted in the recruitment of more staff and additional fund-raising.

On the building side, phase one has begun. This extends the church building to accommodate existing activities during the building work.

Architects and surveyors are now working with the Church and the target for completion is mid-2009. All in all, a lot going on.

Stuart Mitchenall For more information contact: Rev'd Andrew Rumsey, Vicar of Christ Church, Gipsy Hill, SE19 tel: 020 8670 0385 www.gipsyhill.org.uk

ACCIDENT STATISTICS ACCIDENTS ON THE INCREASE IN CRYSTAL PALACE Worryingly, reported accidents in and around the Triangle significantly increased in 2008. In the six months from January to June 2008, 17 accidents were reported, four of them serious with six occurring in the heart of the Triangle. A car driver was seriously hurt at the junction of Westow Street and Ovett Close, a motorcyclist and his pillion were hurt at the junction of Church Road and Milestone Road, and Anerley Hill was the scene of several accidents where a pedestrian, a pedal cyclist and a motorcyclist have all been casualties.

YET MORE VEHICLES IN CHURCH ROAD The proposed 36-unit residential development in Victory Place will mean many more vehicles exiting from Stoney Lane into Church Road, the fastest and narrowest leg of the Crystal Palace Triangle.

Croydon Council has been made aware of the hazards this could cause but has placed no conditions on the developers to lessen the prospect of serious accidents as slow moving vehicles from Stoney Lane enter the never-ending stream of cars, buses, heavy lorries and motorcyclists travelling at 30mph (and more).

In addition, the proposed development on the site of the demolished Post Office and Fireplace Shop in Westow Street, opposite Sainsbury’s, will have 13 parking spaces to be accessed by the narrow lane opposite the cenotaph. It has been suggested that a new set of traffic lights will have to be introduced at this location.

If you care about the area, join the CPCA. Together, your voice counts.

Page 37

HUGE RESIDENTIAL BLOCK APPROVED FOR HEART OF CRYSTAL PALACE TRIANGLE CONSERVATION AREA “The machinations of Croydon’s Planning Committee in its consideration of this application were farcical and beyond comprehension. We saw how the process could be managed, to drive through a scheme of poor quality, low-investment volume house building that has little merit in the historic village context of Crystal Palace and little support from the community. Clearly we have members of the Committee who are not aligned with the people they are supposed to represent”. Don Bianco, CPCA Planning Chair CONSERVATION AREA The Triangle, a designated Conservation Area, a status that affords protection to its many unique and historic buildings, is now threatened by proposals for the largest block of flats it has yet seen. The controversial development in Victory Place, Westow Street, SE19, comprising a contemporary/pastiche 4-storey, L-shaped building of 36 flats, predominantly one-bedroom, and a shop unit on Westow Street received conditional permission on 4 September 2008.

INCREMENTALLY LARGER APPLICATIONS This is the third application for this site submitted by St Aidans Developments. The first, approved

by Croydon in 2005, was for a modest 3-storey building with a shop fronting Westow Street and two 3-bedroom flats above. A second application followed in 2006 for a 4-storey building with retail frontage and a mix of 29 flats.

Now 36 flats have been approved.

CONSERVATION PANEL IGNORED St Aidans’ spokesman, Ivan Bateman, claimed that the “previous scheme was supported by the independent conservation report and the committee liked the scheme” but in fact the North Croydon Conservation Area Advisory Panel had objected to this proposal calling it “monolithic”.

Proposals that involve demolition and development in conservation areas must be referred to English Heritage.

Page 38

Croydon only consulted EH following pressure from the CPCA. EH told Croydon: “it is recommended that this application should be determined in accordance with national and local policy guidance, and on the basis of your specialist conservation advice.”

The Victory Place application is no longer being judged on its merits, but on its primary consideration as a driver for the Portland Road scheme.

VIOLATION OF TRIANGLE CONSERVATION STATUS TO BENEFIT SOUTH NORWOOD Crucially, Mr Bateman revealed that the Victory Place scheme was “the driver for the Portland enterprise”, a development of residential, retail and a local business centre in Portland Road, South Norwood, and that “they both work hand-inhand”. These two schemes had been worked up together so that the requirement for 50% affordable housing would not be included at Victory Place but had been passed to the Portland Road site.

The Victory Place application had been skewed in favour of the Portland Road scheme, to the disadvantage of the Triangle, by the attraction of Local Economic Growth Initiative (LEGI) money.

The resultant imbalance had produced a proposal for the Triangle that is completely at odds with the surrounding architecture and historic street scene. The Victory Place application is no longer being judged on its merits,

but on its primary consideration as a driver for the Portland Road scheme. Thus Crystal Palace loses out yet again.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST Cllr Paul Scott, a strong advocate of the Victory Place application revealed an ‘interest’ in the Portland Road application, and, correctly, withdrew from discussions. However, despite the two schemes being inextricably linked, Cllr Scott did not withdraw from discussions on the Victory Place scheme, was the main speaker in its favour and the proposer of the motion for its approval, despite having serious misgivings about it.

Cllr Scott questioned the massing of the scheme compared with the earlier applications.

Warren Pierson, Principal Planning Officer said, “massing is similar, certain elements set back.

Nothing to warrant any concern”, adding “it will be one of the larger buildings in Westow Street”.

COMMITTEE DIVIDED On first consideration, committee members had reservations over the bulk and massing of the proposed building, its lack of family accommodation and amenity space, and its impact on pedestrian safety and traffic movement. Cllr Perry said, “I really dislike this scheme … where the applicants got it so right in Portland Road, they’ve got it so wrong in Victory Place. This one dominates the host site…something you would find on a university campus not in a Conservation Area”.

Local councillor, George Filbey, considered it “over-development” for the area. Cllr Cakebread said, “I don’t like the residential mix – I think it’s far too many 1-bedroom flats”, a view shared by Cllr Hopley who added, “we do have a need in the borough for 3-bedroom accommodation for families”.

Cllr Maggie Mansell supported the scheme saying it was, “better for couples, for single people, for maybe elderly people” and that “it [Crystal Palace] was not a good area for children”. The CPCA considers Cllr Mansell’s comments discriminatory. Such comments are not a material planning consideration, but could result in imbalance in housing. No study has been undertaken by Croydon or the developer to prove the need for more one-bedroom flats in the Crystal Palace area, in preference to family accommodation.

Cllr Pat Ryan, said: “This development does nothing to enhance the Conservation Area but will positively detract from it. NCCAAP committee have been totally ignored and the development will add to parking and traffic difficulties in the Triangle. If this was Chelsea, or Richmond, it certainly would not be allowed.”

Crystal Palace – “not a good area for children” Cllr Maggie Mansell, Labour member for Norbury

“Such comment is not a material planning consideration but could result in imbalance in housing.”

Don Bianco, CPCA Planning

APPLICATION APPROVED The second meeting, on 4 September 2008, included three reserve members and Cllr Scott again claimed his interest in Portland Road was not a factor when considering the Victory Place application.

The CPCA finds it most irregular that prior to this second meeting, members from both sides were instructed to vote in favour of the application, to ensure the progress of the Portland Road scheme.

Quite bizarrely, in a second vote, and with no changes to the application, it was approved 8 votes to 1.

VOTING CONFUSION AND CONTRADICTION At the first meeting the public believed the Victory Place application had been refused as the motion to ‘approve’ was rejected 5 votes to 4. The Chair, Cllr Chris Wright, who supported the application, then exercised his casting vote to ensure that the motion to ‘refuse’ was lost. After much confusion, the council’s legal officer confirmed that the application was undecided and would need to be brought before the committee again.

Cllrs Filbey and Ryan, who strongly opposed the application, urged the planning committee to conduct a site visit to see for themselves the detrimental impact that such a huge development would have on the Triangle, before the application was reconsidered, but this was not taken up.

A property on Gipsy Hill, within the Conservation Area, acquired by the St Aidans Group and granted planning permission nearly three years ago. The state of the sign and the demonstrable neglect of this acquisition says it all.

NO AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE TRIANGLE Croydon’s UDP Policy H13 states that: “on sites capable of accommodating 30 or more units the Council will negotiate to achieve 50% affordable housing provision.”

However, it was argued that “… as no new floor area is being created then 40% should be the provision on the application”, that element of affordable housing which applied to the previous smaller application.

This ignored the fact that this was a new application.

The report continued: “The provision of affordable housing should remain on the site to which they are related…”, but Croydon has agreed with the developer that the affordable housing requirements of the Triangle development can be transferred to the Portland Road scheme.

Consequently, not one of the new 36 flats at Victory Place will be ‘affordable housing’.

DECEPTION OF S.106 Under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 a local authority and developer may negotiate a legal agreement (also known as planning gain, planning benefits, community benefits or planning obligations) that covers almost any relevant issue and can include cash sums, so that the impact of a particular development on the local community is minimised and will balance the extra pressure from development on the existing social, physical and economic infrastructure in the surrounding area with improvements. The aim is to ensure that a development makes a real and positive contribution to the local area thus helping to make it acceptable within a community.

In the case of Victory Place, this important issue received no discussion at committee. The s.106 ‘sweetener’ will provide a mere £78,680 from this multi-million pound development. However, the Crystal Palace community is unlikely to derive any tangible benefit from even this amount as Croydon are able to absorb this money into their communal coffer.

Page 39

CONSERVATION AREA DEMOLITION WITHOUT PERMISSION Hot on the heels of the huge Victory Place application and a few doors down, comes another large-scale application. Many will have noticed the large space where the Post Office and Fireplace Shop once stood and wondered what is going on.

An application had been submitted for a 4-storey building replacing the previous 2-storey shops at 51-59 Westow Street for which planning permission has previously been granted that integrated the existing buildings into a scheme. Since no permission was granted to demolish the existing shops, a new application excluded the retention of those buildings. But as events unfolded, deficiencies and failings of Croydon Council’s planning process were exposed.

MEETING CRITERIA FOR DEMOLITION Statutory planning legislation is clear concerning matters of demolition.

Section 4.26 and 4.27 of Planning Policy Guidance: Planning and the Historic Environment (PPG15) states there is a presumption “in favour of retaining buildings which make a positive contribution to the character or appearance of a conservation area… proposals to demolish such buildings should be assessed against the same broad criteria as proposals to demolish listed building…Consent should not be given for demolition unless there are acceptable and detailed plans for any re-development”.

Section 3.17 states: “The Secretary of State would not expect consent for demolition to be given simply because redevelopment is economically more attractive to the developer than repair and reuse of an historic building.”

Section 4.29 says that “…demolition shall not take place until a contract for the carrying out of works of redevelopment has been made and planning permission for Page 40

those works has been granted” and continues: “In the past, ugly gaps have sometimes appeared in conservation areas as a result of demolition far in advance of redevelopment.”

All of this is underlined in Policy UC2 of the Croydon Plan.

CROYDON DISREGARDS PLANNING LAW The Planning Officer’s report states: “Whilst the original buildings have already been largely demolished they were in a state of disrepair and uncomplimentary additions had been made over time, it is considered that the buildings were of no particular architectural merit. Given that there has been no objection to redevelopment in principle on previous applications, demolition is considered to be acceptable subject to the replacement building being satisfactory”.

But premature demolition of the Westow Street shops means that these buildings cannot have been properly assessed for their value to the Conservation Area. These small two-storey buildings contributed, in the CPCA’s view, positively to the character, variety and mix of the Conservation Area.

Certainly, the replacement buildings give scant regard to the variety of scale prevalent in the conservation area and erodes that particular characteristic, with only bland reference to architectural features – an approach that PPG15 thoroughly rejects.

Moreover, Croydon failed to consult English Heritage until after demolition had taken place and, in light of the fait accompli, unable to offer meaningful comment on the merits of the existing buildings to the conservation area.

English Heritage should have serious concerns that its authority in the process has been subverted again so soon after Victory Place.

Despite reporting the matter to Croydon Council as soon as the demolition started, over the 3 weeks that it took to demolish the

buildings, Croydon’s Enforcement Team failed to act to stop the action with Peter Woods wongly informing the CPCA that: “it was not unauthorised, but a breach of planning permission, and consent would be granted anyway”.

At the planning committee meeting of 18 September 2008, the matter of “illegal demolition” was raised by one of the members and even clarified through the oral representation of the CPCA. But these concerns were ignored by the presenting planning officer who in misinforming and misdirecting the committee, consequently dismissed the issue and the application went through.

The decision suggests predetermination without due consideration of national and local policy or representation into proper account on the pretext that there was no objection to the principle of redevelopment in a previous application. Not so, since the demolished buildings were never part of that application.

Whilst the current recession makes development increasingly difficult, the opportunistic approach by developers is to bank land, enhancing its value with planning permission before selling it on for profit at the expense of the quality of life of the residents of an area.

The developer has claimed that demolition of the buildings was necessary but has not proved that they were structurally unsound – indeed, the earlier scheme retaining the buildings suggests otherwise - or that they could not be reasonably repaired or adapted so as to extend their useful life.

Neither were the buildings demonstrably marketed as required under PPG15.

Of course, retrospective Conservation Area Consent is irregular and meaningless because the damage to the historic asset has been done and the democratic process hung out to dry. There is no doubt that demolition took

place without Conservation Area Consent, and Croydon has allowed the developer to proceed without penalty; setting a precedent for other developers who wish to flout the law in conservation areas.

As unauthorised demolition in a conservation area is a criminal offence. There is no denying the seriousness of the matter as section 74 of the Town & Country Planning (Listed Buildings & Conservation Areas) Act 1990 imposes the liability of any culpable person to be prosecuted, fined and even imprisoned for such offences.

The conditions applied to the planning permission are in stark contradiction to the fact that demolition had already occurred; with five of them stating that no development shall take place until certain pieces of information are provided to the Council.

There are clear issues of breaches of procedure. In a remarkable volte face, Croydon’s planning officer, Michael O’Brien, admitted to the CPCA that Croydon has failed to implement correct procedures in this case.

LEGACIES As has been shown by the complete cessation of progress at Century House, Church Road, when statutory procedures are flouted, areas can be left to look derelict for years. Whilst the current recession makes development increasingly difficult, the opportunistic approach by developers is to bank land, enhancing its value with planning permission before selling it on for profit at the expense of the quality of life of the residents of an area. This is particularly reprehensible when it happens in a conservation area such as the

Triangle District Centre, which has been struggling to survive.

Croydon did not ensure, through legal agreement and prior to the grant of permission, that funding and other material considerations were in place to guarantee the development.

Additionally, the Council’s failure to deal with the illegal demolition has left a real risk that in the current economic climate this gap site could remain vacant for years, further damaging the appearance of the area.

This is another example of the planning process serving to meet the needs of the developer above those of the community. Despite strong local objection, illegal action, process malfecience, and a committee without local locus, another shocking scheme is dumped on the rump end that is Crystal Palace.

HEARING DATE FOR TRIANGLE EYESORE In Autumn 2006 the CPCA highlighted the massive UNLAWFUL internally illuminated advertising sign, erected by Outdoor Plus Ltd, in the Triangle Conservation Area, on the frontage of Jack Beard’s pub at the top of Anerley Hill - a sign used twice by Mayor Livingstone.

Two years later, Bromley served an enforcement notice, following refusal of planning permission, for the removal of the sign, as covered in our Spring 2008 newsletter.

Bromley inform us that Outdoor Plus Ltd has appealed the planning decision, and an informal hearing originally scheduled for 9 December 2008 with Inspector Bowden, in Bromley Civic Centre Committee Rooms, was deferred to January 2009 and again to 5 March 2009. Should the case have been heard on that date, it will be a further five weeks before the result of the appeal. Any enforcement action is held in abeyance until the Inspector delivers his judgement.

All those who were, and still are, concerned when this monstrous sign was erected in our Conservation Area will await the outcome with interest. Outdoor Plus Ltd will be relying on the complacency and apathy of residents who have got used to this eyesore.

Anyone is allowed to attend the hearing, but if you arrive at 9.30am and register with the Inspector that you would like to make representations, you will be included in the discussion. The whole day will be devoted to this one appeal case, so there will be no waiting around listening to other cases. (Ref: no. 06/00364/UNADV)

Outdoor Plus Ltd will be relying on the complacency and apathy of residents who have got used to this eyesore.

The agent for Outdoor Plus Ltd is RMW POB 237, 47 Green Street, Gillingham, Kent ME7 5DT Tel: 01634 280 908

Page 41

WHEN IS A CRYSTAL PALACE NOT A CRYSTAL PALACE? (When it’s a hotel and entertainment complex)

LETTERS BORIS@BROMLEY.CORN

Sir,

Sir,

Come on out you cowards and fight! That's my message to the moneymen lurking in the shadows behind the so-called “Rebuild Crystal Palace” project, which is being fronted publicly by certain traders on the Triangle, and architect Ray Hall.

I went along to Bromley to listen to the new London Mayor and his assembly members. Boris is an interesting speaker, full of charm but, unfortunately, also full of hot air at times. He and his assembly seem more interested in snapping at each other rather than protecting Metropolitan Open Land in London. I am not interested in the on/off love/hate relationship between the political parties. What shocked me most was the fact that Boris said, in no uncertain terms, that he would leave the fate of Crystal Palace Park in the hands of Bromley Council. Neither he nor any of the members seemed remotely interested in the fact that Bromley is threatening to sorely deprive the local community of sections of this beautiful Victorian park so as to turn it into a building site.

Thanks to Mr Cleverly's strange selection, very few of us were allowed our opinions while one man, in favour of houses being built on the Park, was allowed to ask two questions. Mr Cleverly also wasted a lot of time on questions that had been written in and on allowing assembly members to give rather longwinded political broadcasts instead of allowing as many questions as possible from the floor.

I was left wondering if any assembly member is interested in protecting MOL anywhere in London. I'm off to ask them that very question.

Geraldine Cowan

Page 42

The Crystal Palace Dialogue saw representatives of the local community throw out the Rebuild scheme and overwhelmingly back a managed nature garden option for the overgrown section of the Crystal Palace hilltop next to the TV mast, where the caravan park was originally located. This concept was incorporated into the London Development Agency Masterplan: “At the northern end of the Terrace, the existing ‘Nature Garden’ is incorporated into a series of ecological spaces, enhancing existing ecologies and creating opportunities for increasing biodiversity.” (LDA Masterplan Design & Access Statement) The Rebuild’s followers responded by hatching a scheme with bankers, businessmen, and the Leader of Bromley Council to bring back the threat of commercial development on a public park, which thousands of people fought so hard and so successfully to prevent. It’s nauseating how the Rebuild recycles propaganda directly from the defeated multiplex. With a sense of déjà vu, we hear that it will create over a thousand jobs and revitalise the area - and that it is loved by everyone, except for a few vocal opponents. So why do those bankrolling it skulk in the shadows, when they could emerge and bask in public acclaim? Could it be that the project, once underway, would metamorphose into even less acceptable forms? Its original investor never identified himself.

Last year, supporters crowed that

the Clydesdale Bank had promised over a quarter of a billion pounds.

We wrote, asking how this could make business sense in the present (or any) economic climate, but the Bank and Bromley refused to acknowledge our letters.

The Rebuild's name is misleading.

The Hyde Park and Sydenham Crystal Palaces celebrated the greatest imperial and industrial power the world had ever seen at a heady moment in history, which cannot be recaptured.

Until politicians act decisively over London's parkland, the developers will continue to circle parks like hungry sharks around a sinking life raft.

The Rebuild is about a sordid seizure by moneymen of what is now Metropolitan Open Land in a Grade II* registered park for a hotel, leisure centre and – oh yes, some kind of community facility with charitable status, so that the whole thing can be passed off to the gullible as an act of philanthropy – all packaged up in a Paxtonesque exterior, to cynically exploit nostalgia for the Crystal Palace. If a permanent building for a cultural centre or national exhibition were to be built today, would the Sydenham hilltop be chosen as the prime location? The Rebuild gang chants that nowhere but the historic 1854 Crystal Palace site will do. Yet Hall first wanted a chunk of Blackheath for his project, until local residents fought him off.

The very notion that the future of a public park should be decided by a gaggle of traders in cahoots with big business is outrageous. It highlights a shameful failure of the

politicians to give our public open spaces meaningful protection, and to develop a coherent long-term plan for their management. Until politicians act decisively over London's parkland, the developers will continue to circle parks like hungry sharks around a sinking life raft. For some years, the question of whether public parks are sacrosanct or legitimate targets for development (particularly staff-only and other areas not open to the public) has been fought out on a park-by-park basis. Much public-spirited energy, from many people, which might otherwise have been expended usefully in the community on other essential causes, has been absorbed in fighting politicians, planners and developers. This is not a responsible way to administer public open space.

Don’t be tempted to back the Rebuild scheme, or to give it your valuable time, energy or cash, because a major hotel chain, such as is mooted here, can afford to cough up to promote its own scheme. Why give it unpaid labour?

It’s time for the mystery moneymen step out of the shadows and face our community in person.

Dr Martin Heath, Chair, Ridge Wildlife Group

THE AGE OF CHIVALRY Sir, Perhaps the Age of Chivalry is not dead! My car broke down in the middle of the road in Penge recently. In no time the drivers of cars, which I’d held up either side, had leapt to the rescue and pushed my car to the side. One kindly sent a mechanic along to see if repair was possible. It was not, but while I waited for the AA one gentleman came back to see if I was all right and offered to fetch me a cup of tea.

What kindness on the road.

Audrey Hammond

THE TRIANGLE Sir, We are all aware of the difficult times that confront us, and indeed lie ahead, but I do feel the Triangle is looking quite tired and sad at the moment and has suffered more than most high streets and therefore needs local support more than ever.

None of us like to see empty units, indeed, there are also empty shelves in some shops, which is rather disturbing. However, if you take a leisurely walk around the Triangle, and please do not forget the Church Road section, you may be pleasantly surprised by the small independent shops that exist, and MUST be supported. You really will find some little gems that you won’t get in Croydon or Bromley, although some of these independent shops could do with more creative window displays.

So please do consider the Triangle!

Of course there are other areas of the Triangle that need attention: the pavements (especially the stretch from the top of Gipsy Hill along to Iceland), flooding after heavy rainfall, a consequence of poor drainage design, and the life threatening pedestrian crossing arrangement at the Gipsy Hill/Central Hill section. If you feel as I do, please do bombard the Councils (Lambeth, Croydon and Bromley); it seems the only way to get things done!

And oh how I love the restaurants and some of the pubs in Crystal Palace. We must try hard to keep these afloat during difficult times.

I have been a Crystal Palace resident for over 12 years, and have constantly been told that the area is on ‘the up’. At the moment I feel this is far from the case. As residents of Crystal Palace, we all have a duty to support local trade, and if you have cause for concern on any issue to do with the area, remember, let your local Council know!

Sir, How sadly empty the Triangle was on Christmas Eve … at 10 in the morning. I went to Planta for some necessities and a dear little organic cotton baby vest for our new great granddaughter … how empty and windswept was Westow Hill.

Then down to Lordship Lane – what a contrast; busy with shoppers along its length. There was a 20-metre queue outside the fishmonger and one at least 50metres long outside the organic butcher (which employs 38 people) and others, like the cheese shop, all busy and serving as fast as they could. The whole atmosphere in East Dulwich was hectic and jolly with Christmas shoppers because there they still have real shops!

It’s all very well to have a buzzing restaurant life up here at night but it means that by day the few shops that we have (excellent though they are) have a desperate struggle and there is so little daytime life – and it is so sad.

It is only ten years ago that Crystal Palace was thriving.

Surely it is time to consider the balance of shops to restaurants in the Triangle and rethink the whole planning strategy which brought us to this.

Audrey Hammond

Emmaus offers a home Emmaus offers work Emmaus offers hope Please support the work of Emmaus to help the homeless in our community.

Visit their shop on Knights Hill, near West Norwood Station, find out more on www.emmaus.org.uk or call Majonne on 020 8761 4276

If you care about the area, join the CPCA. Together, your voice counts.

Eileen Digby-Rogers Page 43

CPCA EVENTS Sunday 5th April

A Peter Grant guided walk through London’s East End

CRIME, POVERTY & CURRY Peter has kindly offered to conduct us on another guided walk of adventure and discovery through the unfamiliar back streets of London.

This year the area of exploration will be Whitechapel in the East End of London and feature Jack the Ripper, the Krays, the Elephant Man and, what has been described as “a hotbed of villainy where women sold themselves for a few pence, thieves hung around every corner and in the back alleys there was garrotting” - Samuel Raphael 'East End Underworld' (1981).

The walk will also consider the poverty of the area and those who sought to alleviate it, from Vladimir Lenin to Clement Atlee.

We shall meet at 10.20am for a 10.30 start outside Aldgate East tube station (District Line) on Whitechapel High Street, south side. (Take the left exit out of the tube station.)

As usual, the walk will end at lunchtime at a recommended pub, this time chosen for its curry.

Cost - £6 members, £7 non-members, including a guarantee that all will enjoy themselves. (Victuals and beverages not included.)

Save the date and call us to let us know you’re coming and for the latest travel arrangements.

Tuesday 26 May

Thursday 14 May 2009

Dine at Chi Oriental 14 Westow Hill, SE19 0871 223 8130 This bright and airy Chinese restaurant, serves beautifully fresh and tasty food. The menu has a good selection of popular Chinese dishes as well as interesting variations, for which it is developing a high reputation in the area.

We shall book the table for 7.30pm.

Please let us know if you would like to join us.

CPCA AGM We warmly invite all our members to our 38th AGM

at 7.30 pm on 14 May 2009 at the Goodliffe Hall, Christ Church, Highland Road, off Gipsy Hill, SE19.

Have a say in YOUR Association Business will include reports, an update of issues and events, election of officers for the committee and a chance for you to meet and question your committee, to be followed by a buffet and guest speaker.

Friends of the Horniman ART EXHIBITION in the beautiful Victorian Conservatory of the Horniman Museum

Saturday 4 & Sunday 5 July - 10.30 am to 5 pm ADMISSION FREE

Audrey Hammond and Mike Conrad will be exhibiting their watercolours & drawings.

Page 44

Please support your CPCA events

6 - 12 June 2009

Sunday 12 July

The first Crystal Palace Festival

WALK AROUND HYDE PARK AND KENSINGTON GARDENS

To compensate for the cancellation of this year’s Victorian Weekend, partly due to two consecutive years of awful weather, this year will mark the first Crystal Palace Festival.

followed by a picnic lunch

It will be held in a variety of venues, both indoors and out, between Saturday 6 June and Friday 12 June.

Organised by different local individuals and groups, of which the CPCA is one, the Festival will celebrate the area’s rich history and vibrant present, and with strong public support could be an annual event.

A full programme of all events will be advertised on our website and around the Triangle, as soon as details have been finalised.

Meet at Crystal Palace Station at 9.45am for the 9.58 train to Victoria, and then a short bus ride to Hyde Park Corner for the start of our walk at approx.10.30am.

Hyde Park is 350 acres of historical parkland in the centre of London and the home of Paxton’s original Crystal Palace in 1851. We will pass the site where this iconic building housed the Great Exhibition.

Our walk will pass other attractions including, the Serpentine, the Albert Memorial, the Diana Memorial Fountain, Kensington Gardens and Kensington Palace.

Don’t forget to bring your picnic.

Cost £5 towards CPCA funds.

NEW WORLDS, NEW

DISCOVERIES AND

NEW

INVENTIONS

Kat’s quiz

Friday 19 June

Summer Quiz Night Join us at this fun and friendly event, with our very own quiz mistress Katriona, putting your brain cells to the test.

Book your table for 8 or come on your own and meet new faces or old friends.

Tickets are £8 for members, £9 non-members, to include a fish & chip supper

Tuesday evening 9 June (2 hour walk) Sunday morning 13 September (3 hour walk)

Bring your own drink and glasses but both will be available should you forget.

This themed guided historic walk will incorporate a number of the blue plaques and memorials, in the local area. Learn about the previous residents of the area, discover why their lives have been commemorated and the legacies they have left us.

Doors open 7.15 for a 7.30pm start at the Goodliffe Hall Highland Road, off Gipsy Hill SE19

This walk will be held twice; a shortened version in June as part of the Crystal Palace Festival, and a full length walk in September. Both walks begin at Forsyte Crescent, Church Road, opposite All Saints Church, alongside the ‘other’ transmitter (not the one on the hilltop).

Walk 1, the shortened version (approx 2 hrs long) will take place as part of the Crystal Palace Festival on the evening of Tuesday 9 June, starting at 7.00pm and ending at the Dulwich Wood House pub, Sydenham Hill, for well-deserved refreshment.

Walk 2, the complete version (approx 3hrs) will take place on Sunday 13 September starting at 10.30am and finishing at the bottom of Westwood Hill, Sydenham, where again we plan to end the walk with a drink and a meal, venue yet to be confirmed.

Both walks will have a limited number of places, so please book as soon as possible, but do let us know if you have to cancel so that someone on the waiting list may have your place.

Please note that due to the nature of the area, part of the walk does involve walking uphill.

Each walk costs £5 per person towards CPCA funds (refreshments not included) Call 8670 4395 to book your place or email cpca@onetel.com

Raffle & Prizes & Fun Please book early to allow time to organise the food.

Phone/fax CPCA 8670 4395 or email: CPCA@onetel.com Our winter Quiz Night will be held on Friday 13th November - same time, same place, same good fun.

Save the date now.

OPEN GARDEN SQUARES WEEKEND 13 - 14 June 2009 visit gardens in London not usually open to the public www.opensquares.org Page 45

BREAD MAKING WITH AUDREY HAMMOND Members may have had their palettes tickled, or at least their imaginations tempted, by the home-made raffle prizes at the last Quiz Night.

If a few members are seriously interested in learning how to make delicious and nourishing wholemeal bread - it is very easy - do come to the demonstration.

Audrey has room for five in her kitchen. She will make the bread and members can participate at all stages and take a loaf home.

Bring a pad and pencil for notes.

A home-made soup supper (and surprise dessert!) will be served during rising/waiting times and Audrey will explain her theories about healthy eating and keeping trim (taught initially by her mother, of course) which she has been practicing since long before it became fashionable.

This will be an evening event 7.30 – 9.30 pm and cost £10 members (£12 non-members), all inclusive, to CPCA funds.

Booking is essential – as is your prompt arrival.

Please phone 8670 6239 for date and place.

Tuesday 25 August

Tuesday 1 December

Dine at Mediterranea

Dine at Lorenzo’s Restaurant

21 Westow Street, SE19 Not heading south this summer but would still like to enjoy the food of the Mediterranean then join us for a meal at this modern Mediterranean restaurant, recommended by Time Out magazine.

The food is beautifully fresh and tasty, many dishes inspired from Sardinia, the owner’s native country.

73 Westow Street, SE19 8761 7485 This long-established Italian restaurant, has been a firm favorite in the area for many years, serving pizzas, pasta and a range of other delicious dishes, all very reasonably priced.

Booking for 7.30pm, so let us know if you wish to join us.

We shall book for 7.30pm.

May 24 - June 21 2009 SYDENHAM INTERNATIONAL MUSIC FESIVAL The sixth Sydenham International Music Festival offers a real feast of live music to match anything in London. Highlights include the British debut of Serbian cellist Maja Bogdanovic, virtuoso Russian violinist Sergey Dogadin, the Endellion String Quartet, the baroque ensemble Florilegium, the Fidelio Piano Quartet and the virtuoso St Bartholomew Festival Orchestra under Robert Trory.

The children’s concert this year will be Prokofiev’s ‘Peter & the Wolf’.

Tickets, by post, telephone or in person from Kirkdale Bookshop, 272 Kirkdale, Sydenham, SE26 4RS 020 8778 4701

Sunday 11 October

CIRCULAR WALK AROUND THE RURAL AREAS OF WEST WICKHAM West Wickham is only 5 miles away from Crystal Palace, but during the course of our autumn recreational walk, we will discover ancient woods, common land, parkland, pass the historical home of Anne Boleyn’s uncle and aunt, as well as other sites of interest.

19 & 20 September 2009

OPEN HOUSE Open House London is the Capital's largest architectural showcase; now in its 17th year.

Saturday 19 & Sunday 20 September, Londoners (and visitors) can explore all corners of the Capital, inspired by the power of architecture to transform the quality of our lives.

Over 700 buildings of every type, shape, size and use, from the Banqueting House on Whitehall to the Brunel Museum in Rotherhithe (where you’ll find the best home-made cakes), will open their doors completely for free. Some give tours, others allowing you to roam.

A printed booklet listing every London borough, and the properties each has chosen to open to the public, will be available from mid-August, or visit www.openhouse.org.uk to place your order in advance.

The walk will start at 10.30am outside the Swan Public House, on the corner of the High Street and Station Road, West Wickham. (We shall car share and if you require a lift, please let us know.) The walk will finish back at the Swan, where we plan to lunch and partake of liquid refreshment.

Cost £5 for CPCA funds. (Refreshments not included) Somerset House and the view from William Booth College, Denmark Hill

Page 46

South London

T HEATRE For great entertainment right on your doorstep This thriving community theatre, based in the old West Norwood fire station, has two theatre spaces producing 22 plays a year ranging, this year, from Shakespeare through Ibsen, Brecht, Pinter to Joe Orton, Dario Fo and Alan Ayckbourn.

The SLT welcomes new members and gives everyone the opportunity to be part of a production. But those who choose the vital role of member of the audience are especially welcome.

Join the SLT on a Wednesday evening between 8-10 pm or via the website.

2A Norwood High Street West Norwood SE27 9NS www.southlondontheatre.co.uk

The boys entertaining an appreciative crowd outside the Royal Albert on Westow Hill.

The Effras SE19's very own rock balladeers, the Effras, will be outside the White Hart, 96 Westow Streeet (corner of Church Road) SE19, on 28 March 2009 at 8pm as part of the Triangle Festival. On 9 May they will be at The Plough, 381 Lordship Lane, SE22, as part of the Dulwich Festival.

The boys (although they have a combined age of well over 200 years...) are busy recording an album, which their lead singer and songwriter, Andrew Rumsey,

Warehouse Theatre4Kidz £4.50 children, £6 grown-ups.

The Warehouse also arrange children’s parties after the show.

For details please contact 020 8680 4794 or visit: www.warehousetheatre.co.uk The Warehouse Theatre, Dingwall Road, Croydon CR0 2NF East Croydon BR

FARMERS’ MARKETS Farmers’ Markets offer good quality, fresh and seasonal local produce grown often within a fifty mile radius. The variety of stalls vary from market to market but one can usually find fresh seasonal fruit and vegetables, outdoor-reared meat, bread and cakes, local cheeses, preserves, olives, fruit juices and plants.

West Norwood Farmers Market 1st and 3rd Saturday of the month 10am -3pm West Norwood High Street at the junction with Lancaster Avenue

Streatham High Road 2nd Saturday of the month, 10-2pm outside the Odeon Cinema

Dulwich Farmers’ Market 4th Sunday of the month, 9am-1pm Dulwich College quad produce and arts and crafts stalls

Hillyfields Farmers’ Market, 2nd Saturday of the month, 10 am to 3 pm.Hillyfields park, Brockley

Telegraph Hill 4th Saturday of the month, 10-2 pm northeast of Nunhead Cemetery

Support your local farmers and reduce your food miles!

assures us, should be ready in the next few months.

Last Autumn the Effras performed on the forecourt of the Royal Albert as part of the Crystal Palace Triangle Festival and will return indoors to the White Hart and The Alma to sing their songs of lost rivers, Routemaster buses, and the Crystal Palace Fire.

Have a look at www.myspace.com/theeffras for more information, or check the CPCA website for our dates.

13 to 17 August 2009 Modern Pentathlon World Championships at

Crystal Palace National Sports Centre This summer, London will host the Modern Pentathlon World Championships; thrilling sporting action across five events with top pentathletes.

Competitors take part in shooting, running, fencing, swimming and show jumping.

These will be the first World Championships of an Olympic sport to be held in London since 1986.

For more information visit: www.pentathlongb.org/mpwc

With your correct email we can keep you informed of events.

Page 47

Denniss Matthews Solicitors Established 1791

Domestic & Commercial Conveyancing (written estimates given)

Wills & Estates Company Law Accident Claims Matrimonial and All forms of Litigation 145 Anerley Rd London SE20 8EG Tel: (020) 8778 7301/7631 Fax (020) 8778 6782 dm@denniss-matthews.co.uk www.denniss-matthews.co.uk

Bandlish Dental Surgery 5 Gipsy Hill, Upper Norwood, London SE19 1QG WELCOME TO BANDLISH DENTAL SURGERY providing all kinds of quality dentistry Monday to Friday 9am to 6 pm and Saturday 9 am to 1 pm.

EVENING EMERGENCY DENTAL Tuesdays,Wednesdays,Thursdays 5.30 pm until 7.30 pm (NHS)

PRIVATE CALL OUT SERVICE after 7.30 pm.

In case of dental emergency, kindly call 07730 963 127 We aim to provide the highest out of normal surgery hours. quality of clinical care and treatment, and are committed to Continuing Professional Education to constantly upgrade our techniques.

We are a very friendly, sympathetic and prevention-orientated team.

We are a modern practice located at the top of Gipsy Hill, ten minutes walk from Gipsy Hill BR station and five minutes from Crystal Palace Parade.

Limited parking is available in front of the practice.

0% FINANCIAL PLAN Bandlish Dental Surgery are now able to offer a 0% interest free financial plan to enable our patients to have the treatment of their choice: cosmetic dental treatment, implants, crowns, teeth whitening and more.

Tel: 020 8670 2296, 020 8761 3609 Fax: 020 8488 4794 email: LKBandlish@aol.com www.bandlish.co.uk

We provide various services subject to consultation, including: • Cosmetic/white fillings • Implants • Crowns & Bridges • Tooth whitening • Home visits • Same-day gold fillings • Same-day denture repairs • Hygiene appointments • Prophyjet stain removal • Panoramic x-ray imaging • Orthodontic referrals • Dental photography • EMERGENCY SERVICE

CPCA c/o 10 Jasper Road, Upper Norwood, London SE19 1SJ Tel / Fax: 020 8670 4395 cpca@onetel.com

www.cpca.org.uk

Member of the London Forum of Amenity & Civic Societies and the Open Spaces Society Registered Charity No. 261790