LOCAL HISTORY PROGRAMME
Walks & Talks


21.08.08
Herne Hill Harriers - Kevin Kelly

18.09.08
Cottages of Old Surrey - Betty Griffin

21.09.08
South Norwood Country Park
Meet at Stanley Halls, South Norwood Hill at 2.30
Walk led by May Johnson

05.10.08
All Saints? to Crown Point
Meet at All Saints? Church, Upper Norwood at 2.30
Walk led by Richard Lines

16.10.08
Portland Road, South Norwood - May Johnson

20.11.08
Kennington & Stockwell - Jim Nicholson

18.12.08
Christmas Party (Local History)


OTHER EVENTS

Sunday 7th September
Thornton Heath High Street
Stall & Display

Saturday 13th September
Upper Norwood Joint Library ? Local History Day
Includes talk at 2.00 p.m. on Buildings in Norwood by
Keith Holdaway

Sunday 21st September
Kingswood House Open Day 1-4.30 pm ? Display

Saturday 27th September
Upper Norwood Joint Library ? Local History Day
Includes talk on Pissarro in Norwood by Richard Lines ? Bookstall

Saturday 7th October
London Maze, Guildhall, city of London
Lambeth Local History Stall and many others

Saturday 8th November
Lambeth Archives Open Day ? Norwood Society Stall

Crystal Palace Park

Planning Application No: DC/07/03897/OUT
Conservation Area Consent No: DC/07/03906/CAC

?The Master Plan?

The above applications submitted by the LDA contain in our view much that is good and beneficial, especially the renovation of the Paxton terraces, the restoration of the great central avenue from the Penge Gate to the lower terrace and the removal of the ugly spreads of concrete which currently disfigure the National Sports Centre. However, we have serious concerns about some aspects of the proposals, in particular:

1. We are strongly opposed to the sale of parts of the park for housing development. We appreciate that this is intended to raise some £32 million towards paying for the improvements envisaged in the application. We doubt whether it will do so. The housing market is currently at best static and at worst actively declining. This is particularly true of new residential building, and speculative builders of residential housing estates in many parts of the country are having to cut the asking prices of their products in order to effect sales. The market is unlikely to recover in the near future since we do not foresee any early renewal in the availability of almost unlimited credit, which was until recently the principal factor in driving it upwards. However, our main objection is one of principle; we are opposed to 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. This is contrary to existing Government policy, the Mayor?s London Plan and Bromley?s own UDP. We have particularly strong objections to the loss of valuable open land arising from the proposed commercial development of the Rockhills and Sydenham Gate sites. Some infill along the southern boundary of Crystal Palace Park Road, already partly developed in the Victorian period, might be marginally acceptable, though only in the form of houses, not blocks of flats. Otherwise there should be no building within the existing park except building which is related to its function as the largest and most important park in South London.

2. We are not opposed in principle to the idea of a hostel at Ledrington Road, though we would reserve judgement until the LDA can come forward with a design for the proposed building which harmonises with both the park and the existing built development in the area (which does not mean that we are advocating a pastiche).


3. We are opposed to the planned concrete walkway in the English Nature Garden. Concrete treetop walkways do not represent a traditional feature of such gardens. The proposed walkway would represent a discordant element entirely at odds with the natural aspect which it is intended to create, and would probably act as a deterrent to the treetop birdlife which it is desired to encourage. Scrapping it, which is desirable in itself, would release additional funds required for the regeneration of the park.
We have serious doubts about the proposed two huge glasshouses, for much the same reasons as we are opposed to the treetop walkway. They would introduce a highly intrusive element to the park and as a result of their overbearing size would detract significantly from the visual effect of the Paxton terraces. The necessity for such large and intrusive buildings in the centre of the park is not apparent. Two modest single storey greenhouses on the sites in question would be entirely acceptable and, in the absence of any good reason for the height of the glasshouses proposed, entirely adequate. They would also have the effect of releasing funding for the improvements to the rest of the park.

4. We have concerns about the design of the proposed new swimming pool and how it will relate to the surrounding parkland. Although the idea of placing it partly underground is acceptable in principle, it appears to create lighting problems which cannot be easily resolved (and are not in our view resolved in the submitted plan) without adverse impact on its integration with the park. We would urge that further consideration be given to this matter before approval is given.

Philip Goddard
Chairman, Planning Sub-Committee, The Norwood Society

26th May 2008

Sunday 7th September
Thornton Heath High Street - Stall and Display

Sunday 13th September
Upper Norwood Joint Library - Local History Day
Talk at 3.00 pm on the topic of Buildings in Norwood by Keith Holdaway

Sunday 21st September
Kingswood House Open Day 1-4.30 - Display

Saturday 27th September
Upper Norwood Joint Library - Local History Day
Talk at 3.00 pm on the topic of Pissarro in Norwood by Richard Lines

Saturday 7th October
London Maze - Guild Hall, City of London - Lambeth Local History Stall and many others

Saturday 8th November
Lambeth Archives Open Day - Norwood Society Stall

Sunday 7th September