Houses built in Crystal palace park?

[leenewham]

So Duke, the building 'in the park' is between the existing buildings already in the park and in the CARAVAN park, formally the site of a house and currently full of caravans with no public access.

They aren't actually building on green grass or open public space?

Some of the buildings look good, others not so good. I hate all this 'design language' nonsense sa in 'there are some greenhouses nearby so lets stick something that looks like a green house on the roof.

A bit like 'there are some rusty gas towers near bell green, so lets make the architecture reflect that by making it out of rusty coloured breeze blocks'.

[michael]

Those breeze blocks aren't 'rusty coloured', they are 'Hawaiian sunset' and fit beautifully with the metal palm trees and the sea blue towers.
A-loha Sydenham!

[Eagle]

Build on agricultural land ( allotments ) would be a disaster. We do need food and a lot of people get a lot of relaxation out of them.

Also South London could do with a camp site , caravan park.

[Duke of Clarence]

So Duke, the building 'in the park' is between the existing buildings already in the park and in the CARAVAN park, formally the site of a house and currently full of caravans with no public access.They aren't actually building on green grass or open public space?

I get the impression you are looking at impact from a one dimensional angle. It's not just the look of the development it's the impact of it's use. For example the footprint of the actual building maybe W but the surrounding infratructure that will be developed to facilitate it, such as access, amenity and car parking is X, Y + Z.

Now I'm no Einstein but let me introduce you to the Dukethagoros Theory:

W + (x+Y+Z)2 = Deep Impact

[Voyageur]

....Now I'm no Einstein but let me introduce you to the Dukethagoros Theory: W + (x+Y+Z)2 = Deep Impact

Very good Dukey!

[Eagle]

Duke

You may not be Einstein but you are an aristocrat. How does one address a Duke and Duchess , if you have a lady wife

[Duke of Clarence]

....Now I'm no Einstein but let me introduce you to the Dukethagoros Theory: W + (x+Y+Z)2 = Deep Impact

Very good Dukey!

Thanks V

Duke
You may not be Einstein but you are an aristocrat.

Quite right Eagle, most noble of bird in birdom!

How does one address a Duke and Duchess

You can call me what you wish my friend and address me with civility

Grace and favour

DoC

[michael]

Also South London could do with a camp site , caravan park.

Like the one in Abbey Wood?

[dickp]

It's a good job caravans have wheels, and are designed to be attached to cars. Abbey Wood is an awful long way to push a house...

[leenewham]

But Duke, unlike you, the great unwashed that will be living in these houses wont need staff, garages for their fleet of cars, a moat or a duck house.

X&Y=Coldplay album (Coldplay are a popular band who have sold a lot of records in the hit parade and played in Crystal Palace Park, a place often full of people, as it was when the Palace was there which attracted tens of thousands of visitors).

I'm sure it can manage to cope with 190 flats.

It's quiet where I live despite having over 180 houses in my road, many of which are flats. I'd guess that there are a lot more than 600 people living in my road.

[Tim Lund]

I get the impression you are looking at impact from a one dimensional angle.

Angles are always dimensionless, being the ratio between two distances - the length of a sector of a circle's circumference and its radius multiplied by some other dimensionless scaling factor to get it to degrees or whatever.

I'm sure you wanted to know that

[Eagle]

190 flats is a lot of units. This seems a much bigger devolopment than I understood. I cannot help thinking that it is a bad idea for the area.

[tulse hill terry]

This is a con, all this land can be returned to public access without using any of it for redevelopment for housing.

Insisting on redevelopment, with the promise of the return of land to public use sometime after is a rhetorical offer . . .

I remain amazed how many consider the pros and cons, when the redevelopment will come first, then a wait for the land to be returned to public use.

Don't hold your breathe in between . . . .

[ALIB]

What a Payne

[Duke of Clarence]

Hear, hear tulse hill terry!

But Duke, unlike you, the great unwashed that will be living in these houses wont need staff, garages for their fleet of cars, a moat or a duck house.

Again Lee approaches this from a one dimensional and, if I may say, somewhat dubious angle. The outline planning permission is for private commercial development but that aside it is the number of occupants, density of dwellings and infrastructure needed to support this that is the issue, not whether it is private or social housing.

And can we please clear up the myths about the parkland designated for the private housing:
1) the Sydenham Gate parkland has never had housing on it.
2) the existing Villas on CPP Rd were built on parkland sold by the Crystal Palace Company when it got into financial difficulties back in the days.

X&Y=Coldplay album (Coldplay are a popular band who have sold a lot of records in the hit parade and played in Crystal Palace Park, a place often full of people, as it was when the Palace was there which attracted tens of thousands of visitors).

How often do you use CPP? It attracts millions of visitors in it's current form. The NSC is heaving every time I use it and there's always something going on in the park. Do you remember what happened to Paxton's white elephant Lee? I'll remind you, it became practically redundant before it went up in flames. The reality was it was a one trip wonder that cost too much to maintain and too much for the masses to gain entry. This resulted in the company falling into financial difficulties and selling of bits of the park for housing to make ends meet. Sound familiar?

I'm sure it can manage to cope with 190 flats. It's quiet where I live despite having over 180 houses in my road, many of which are flats. I'd guess that there are a lot more than 600 people living in my road.

O dear. It's a park Lee, a public amentity, paid for by the public for the public - not a piece of real estate.

I'm amazed to see some of our so called community leaders clambering to support the sale of a public amenity to private developers - especially when they have such poor grasp of the facts. The housing aspect could be, and in my view is highly likely to be, constructed way before CPP sees any of the token revenue. And just how far will £5m go to meet the £120m implentation costs - not very - maybe buy some restoration, benches and planting...

The turning of tarmac to turf is welcome but it's not quite the green dream some seem to think. The turfing over of the carpark means new parking space is needed for displaced events parking. Guess where the Masterplan will be relocating the carpark? The hilltop!

Yes the hill top at the side of the transmitter will be turned from turf to tarmac - so gain/loose you decide.

[leenewham]

Oh Duke, are you taking my past post seriously?

I don't remember what happened to Paxtons incredible and beautiful structure as I was born in 1971.

I've been to the museum, had some guided walks, been to the museum and read lots of books about it though.

A few questions to your most noble self:

Does anyone have a map showing exactly where the building is taking place as no-one seems to know where the building is EXACTLY (just as many people don't know where the palace was in the park). My understanding is that they are building on the caravan park, is this not the case?

Do you have a problem with the large Victorian Villas or do you think these should be knocked down and returned to the park?

What community leaders are clambering for the sale of public amenity?

[Tim Lund]

I'm amazed to see some of our so called community leaders clambering to support the sale of a public amenity to private developers

Are they roped up, wearing crampons, maybe? Is this you, your Royal Highness? Can we have a better picture?

[downthehill]

For those who prefer to deal in reality not myth, there's some visualisations of what the housing might look like here

http://www.crystalpa...patternbook.pdf

There's so much, IMHO, inaccurate hyperbole about the housing - take the proposed development of the caravan park. This is land which is not curently accessible as parkland and will not be until the lease is up in 2019. So there's is a 5 year window of opportunity to explore whether alternative funding to that of housing can be found before a brick can even be laid on this site .

And even if development did go ahead the footprint of the housing as far as I can see will actually be much smaller than the current caravan park - so there is a net gain of parkland

Yes the housing will only raise part of the total funds require to implement the masterplan. But it's a start and IMHO , there is far more likelihood of match funding from other sources like the National Lottery if there is asoem seed capital availaible. And let's face facts - Bromley council are never , ever, going to dig into their pockets to come up with the cash especially in teh current economic climate.

The £11 million which would be raised is also subject to very specific legal agreements. As required by the SoS the amended planning agreements entered into between Bromley and the LDA contain a copy of the agreement a developer must enter into before undertaking any development.

The agreements include express, contractually binding guarantees that a minimum sum of £11 Million , must be paid up front by the developer into a designated bank account (plus a possible later top up contribution based on profits made the developer) . The agreements also set out that the money must be spent on specific, listed, aspects of the masterplan and that those specific works must be completed before any of the housing can be occupied.

Not sure how to imbed docs on this forum but the the agreements (which include site maps of the proposed developments are here (at post 21)

http://www.virtualnorwood.com/forum/top ... ge__st__15

Basically they provide that as a minimum:

1. £5 million must be paid up front and applied towards specific aspects of the masterplan (described as "Part A work's and set out at page 16)

2. £6 million must be paid up front and applied towards specific aspects of the masterplan (described as "Part B work's and set out at page 17)

3. £1 million must be paid up front and applied towards specific aspects of the masterplan (described as "Part C work's and set out at page 17)

[leenewham]

Thanks downthehill.

I thought I'd post some of the images from the link to (hopefully) make some more sense of this.

The orange dots are where the houses will be:



Top is in the caravan park, which currently isn't NOT open parkland and is behind a wall (which I hope will be saved) which formed part of the Crystal Palace and is ONLY accessible through the gate into the current caravan park.

So on the map it kinds looks like the houses will be in the area marked in yellow on this map (the red outline is roughly where the caravan park is. Correct me if I"m wrong, it's just a guess on my part to try to bring some clarity to this.



The other dots follow the line of victorian villas near the Sydenham Gate.

Again this is my estimate in yellow where the houses will be which looks like they are next to the carpark and the St james ambulance shed.



The fact is, from the plans, no-one seems to know the exact location and footprint of park that these buildings will be.

Here are the visuals of the houses by Sydenham gate:





I have to admit, I rather like them.

[Eagle]

This is the thin end of the wedge.

Are these so called affordable houses?