CRYSTAL PALACE PLANS TO BE UNVEILED

[SE19]

Just to add, if you believe the BBC news story (that starts this thread) that "Plans to build a replica of the Crystal Palace" is misleading, then please contact the BBC news team. I have.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-24375547

I cannot see evidence in the Arup detailed brochure that they considering to "build a replica of the Crystal Palace". Prospectus found here: http://www.thelondoncrystalpalace.com/


"This proposal is to rebuild the Crystal Palace" with some aspect that will be similar (“footprint, outline and scale” and “translucent and delicate structure”) and some that replicate (“size and scale”)... but Arup have not stated they will " build a replica of the Crystal Palace".

So such prominent statements from BBC news team may influence perceptions.

SE19

[leenewham]

Open letter from Mr Ni Zhaoxing
Chairman of ZhongRong Group:

http://www.thelondoncrystalpalace.com/o ... unity.html

[CaptainCarCrash]

Open letter from Mr Ni Zhaoxing
Chairman of ZhongRong Group:

http://www.thelondoncrystalpalace.com/o ... unity.html

I also want to emphasise one final point. The Crystal Palace holds a special place in the history of your country and in the heart of the local community. It was a symbol of imagination, pride and national confidence. That brings a special responsibility for me and for my company to listen and to learn from local residents as we seek to shape the next chapter of this special building. We will take that responsibility very seriously.

[leenewham]

WTF?

[CaptainCarCrash]

WTF?

Just an acknowledgement of a Chinese Nail house, construction sites where elderly people refuse to sell up so they are built round until the pressure from the construction companies involved forces the owner to comply.

It's a well documented technique employed by the Chinese government and the building companies they are partnered with.

[leenewham]

Not just in China. I saw a documentary called UP which was just the same. The man actually tied loads of balloons to his house to get out of there! Obviously this is exactly the same scenario as the one you posted as all Chinese act in exactly the same way don't they?

Shocking behaviour by China! How dare they undermine a park by turning Sydenham and the surrounding area into a quarry.

Although how many balloons it would take to float the park away to South America is anyones guess.

[CaptainCarCrash]

Very good Lee

I suppose the message I was trying to relay was that once a developer from that part of the world has their eye on a specific location, come hell of high water they won't stop until they get what they want.

[Nigel]

By way of moderation - it is fair to say that the way planning disputes are dealt with in China is incomparable with what we would expect .
It is well documented and tragic - several suicides have followed and countless findings of criminal behaviour on the part of contractor or council .
In case anyone in any doubt , the documentary Lee is referring to is an animated tale , and a very charming one at that .
In terms of information value I think CaptainCarCrash's Nail House is more persuasive overall.....
To say that business practices in China are different to the UK would not be excessive .
A very good afternoon
Nigel

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[JRobinson]

There was another famous case where they built a three or four lane highway around either side of a mans house, because he refused to sell up.

of course over here we have the case where tenants are told that they'll be rehoused in the new social housing when the redevelopment is finished, and that owner occupiers will get given a reasonable value for the sale of their house back to the council. The tenants get shipped all over the borough away from friends relatives and neighbours, or out of the borough or even out of London, a very small percentage of whom will ever move back into the social housing as the number was reduced by the developer as it makes more profit. The value offered to owners is ridiculously short, the council then turn off the water, and stop providing support for heating, and stop picking up litter, etc, and then compulsory purchase orders are served, and then the person gets evicted before the building is flattened. The council go back on the vast majority of promises, they say they're building the largest new park in central london, but actually reducing the overall green space by 50%. They sell the land to the developer, for half what it's worth, and let the developer renaig on all the green environmentaly practices that were going to be put in place, and even though it's planned for the Millenium, still in 2013 there are a few people living there who have yet to either accept offers, or be pushed out (evicted - even though council say no evictions have taken place).

(Un)Fortunately this isn't Lewisham - but it is Southwark, and this is happening as we speak on The Heygate Estate at Elephant And Castle - it's an absolute disgrace, and yet somehow they get away with sh1t like this!

but I'm sure Crystal Palace won't be like that.

[Voyageur]

Don't bet on it!

[michael]

Don't bet on it!

Given that nobody currently lives on the site of the Crystal Palace such a scenario is highly unlikely.

[Voyageur]

Don't bet on it!

Given that nobody currently lives on the site of the Crystal Palace such a scenario is highly unlikely.

True - but my point was that CPOs may well become a reality if enough local road links are to be established to feed this monster.

[downthehill]

As someone who lives on one of the roads which is likely to act as a feeder route , if the plans, as currently formulated, go through , I am worried about traffic levels but I am not at all convinced about the doommongering that the plans will result in gridlock and vast numbers of HGVs arriving to service the building. Yes that might be true if this was a huge Westfield requiring constant restocking and retail footfall. But that's not what is proposed , at least based in the sketchy details to date

It's being promoted as an exhibition space, hotel with.some, unspecified retail. The mention at the press launch , which is opt in the propaganda, sorry prospectus, if of a 3000 space car park, possibly underground

Naturally large exhibitions and the set up and break down of such events ,like an international trade show, would attract traffic but just how many such events would be on in s year. Would ot be anymore say than when the park and NSC were in their heyday with concerts and athletics events attracting crowds of 5000 to 15000 ?

And we do have parts of London with large exhinihiond which attract massive crowds but not traffic . The museums in South Ken , the Royal Albert hall etc. Albeit these are served with higher frequency tube trains than local rail.

I guess it all.depends on just how sucessfull the scheme is in attracting crowds and what is attracting them

Personally, I am currently much more worried that the "this is the new Crystal Palace" messsaging is being used to distract attention from.the fact that there is no evidence, yet , that this will.be anything more than a pastiche which.will be nothing more than.a passing resemblance to the old palace.

A bit like some of those bizarre themed hotels you see in Las Vegas.

For example to build this may involve repealing the Crystal Palace Act 1990 which restrict Bromley to only being able to grant a 125 year lease of the land, restricts the amount of the land it can.lease to.about 30 to 40% of the proposed footprint and which contains a provision that any new build must be in the architectural style of the Crystal Palace. When.that act was passed , to facilitate a proposed hotel.and leisure complex (sound familiar) there was a lot of debate, and later litigation, about what the "arcitectural.style" words meant but some argued it meant keeping key parts of the old buildig like its axis and central.transcept

Equally the 1951 Act may have to be repealed as this also places llimits on the type of use, mainly arts recreation.and the promotion of commerce or industry

If these are swept away , as seems likely, then what ? Zhongrong would then have a clear field to.depart from the new CP PR and simply slap up a low budget replica which on.closer inspection.will be no more unique or interesting than any other large ,modern.glass and steel fabrication

And that's before we even.get onto the topic of what will go in it, will it work as a business, will it raise the 100 million for the park.and will it stand the test of time.

This will be with us for decades so.it must be right and of the highest possible quality and sustainable.

I have my doubts, even though I have always been.open.to mixing private development with public realm to fund the park.

Putting up office blocs in China and running small cap energy businesses and leveraged US property co's is ot the same as a cutting edge, landmark building of sufficient quality to attract 3 to
5 milling.visitors for the next 50 to 70 years

I mean Mr Ni no disrespect in this. I just am not convinced the track record or pedigree of what he has done in the past means he can deliver what he says. I hope , at least in terms of vision. I am wrong because if we must have this it better be something we won't look back on with regret and sorrow

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[Sid Nam]

From what I can see the previous LDA consultations made no difference to the outcome, which seems similar to now, in that there was an element of predetermination as the application was both supported, promoted and decided by Bromley regardless of public opposition. The Crystal Palace Act was easily side stepped and the no vote was not loud enough despite being much more than a vocal minority. Some interesting history here http://www.crystalpalacecampaign.org/

"In March 1998, 11 months after the initial planning application, the Secretary of State lifted the Article 14 Direction having been satisfied that the proposal did not conflict with the 1990 Crystal Palace Act or the Borough's Unitary Development Plan, and that issues to do with traffic and urban regeneration had been satisfactorily addressed. Bromley were advised that they could determine the application 'as they think fit'. On 24th March the Borough's Development Control Committe did just that and gave outline planning permission for a building designed to contain an 18/20-screen multiplex, nine restaurants/bars, three cafes, three retail units and three 'leisure boxes' to contain activities such as ten-pin bowling and a 'family entertainment centre'.

Undaunted, the Campaign called another public meeting for 29th April to appeal for funds so as to mount a legal challenge to Bromley's grant of outline planning permission. The response was overwhelming and the appeal for funds led to an injection of around £25,000 in cash and pledges over a ten-day period."

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[michael]

Jim Dowd has arranged an adjournment debate on Tuesday to discuss the Crystal Palace plans. It will be interesting to hear his views.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[Voyageur]

Jim Dowd has arranged an adjournment debate on Tuesday to discuss the Crystal Palace plans. It will be interesting to hear his views.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Who's he?

[michael]

Who's he?

The local MP. The debate is in parliament.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[Voyageur]

Who's he?

The local MP. The debate is in parliament.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Ah - much obliged

[downthehill]

I think Sid you are confusing the multiplex proposals in the late 1990's , which had nothing to do with the LDA and the LDA Masterplan which was developed from 2007.

The publc consultations, when not disrupted by a very vocal no to housing local Citizens (plenty of other no-ers behaved perfectly well and made room for other views) were actually productive. For example early stage plans included housing and a piazza adjacent to.th CP triangle , opposite the Westow House . Equally the MP did not contain any proposal to develop the top site ,reflecting the published survey results which indicated ,at that time, that commercial.development wad not popular.

Mind you consultations are only really as good as the numbers who participate and the right questions being asked. Bit like petitions really. The CPCA made a big play about the 7000 signature petition.it gathered but it asked people to sign.up to a very simplistic statement of principle that parkland should not be sold for housing. There was no context at all such as explaining how much housing, where it would be , what it would raise, how the money would be used to.part fund the MP, what the MP actually was nor that ,net. If implemented the Mp returned more land to public access than.was lost..For eaxanple the footprint of the housing on the side of the Caravan Park was just 30% of the land occupied by the Caravan club and would raised 7 million.of capital against a platry 30 k per year rent from the Caravan Club

I vividly remember the CPCA' s little gazebo erected outside the consultation.tent in the park.and the way I was collared in the way in and then.interrogated on the way out as to what I thought and should have thought.

The absence of context was a key criticism.at public enquiry albeit that the antis also cried foul over the consultation.

This time around I hope the organisers box clever and make sure there are plenty of ways to freed back views in a civilised way and plenty of social media and online surveys etc made available so locals can express their views free from propagandists and filibusters who think.noise equates to meaningful debate.

I'm sure local forums will also play a vital role. As I recall this one got a hammering when locals used it to complain about rentamob and barrack room lawering at the LDA consultation but posters and admin were made of sterner stuff and told the mob to bog off

Incidentally the map of the Zhongrong exclusivity zone (is it me or does that sound like something from MASH) is now available online here

http://www.bromley.gov.uk/downloads/fil ... ement_plan

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[stuart]

Incidentally the map of the Zhongrong exclusivity zone (is it me or does that sound like something from MASH) is now available online here

http://www.bromley.gov.uk/downloads/fil ... ement_plan

My goodness me - that's more than half the park and includes the maze and the upper lake. Well one has to wait to see what they propose. There is a big difference from development of what is 'dead' land and the heavily used park areas.

A touchstone for me will be maintaining (or even increasing) the area of open green parkland. Everything else is negotiable.

Stuart