Aristide

Hi DaveR I think the problem with your argument is, like the one where one accuses all cyclists of jumping red lights whenever they try to talk about the dangers of cycling,that it belittles justifiable concerns over the ever increasing pressures on a profession that we all rely upon. There is a huge recruitment crisis in state education at the moment, and this governments way of attacking that is to force all schools to become academies so that hey can employ unqualified teachers. The crisis itself justifies the article. Would I be right to assume that you think all Junior doctors are all whingers as well?

London is the most successful city on the planet at the moment, our creative industries, the envy of the world- we must be doing something right. London's economy is a tribute to the education system of the past. Testing and bashing of professionals whilst marginalising the value of the arts and sport and the privatisation of one of the most important public services doesn't seem a very clever way of building on what, as the article stated, was a system on the up. The problem with education as that everyone has an experience of it which makes them think that they know more than the professionals. You wouldn't do it with dentists, lawyers or engineers, why do it with teachers?

???? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Yup let's go back to the absolutely fantastic > standards that characterised LEA inner city state > schools in the 70s/80s and 90s....er not I think, if you actually read the article, it is saying go back to the Ed Balls period in education of the last but one government. The Labour government started by investing in London educaton, this was then cut off at the knees by the coalition and now London has the best state education in the country, go figure!

surely if the current site is unsuitable for any other uses than a football club then no matter the ownership, there will be a football club on it. Excuse me if this has already been discussed but is there any mileage in getting the club listed as a community asset, it has (partially) worked for the half moon and the Nags Head pubs.

taper Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > edhistory Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Excellent work. > > > > We now have a benchmark against which we can > judge > > the accuracy of any plans the Hadley group > utter. > > > > Will the authorised people within Southwark > > Council agree to the enclosure of MOL and > transfer > > of ownership of the land to a foreign property > > development company? > > > > John K > > > An awful lot of Southwark's MOL is enclosed. > Nunhead Reservoir, Dulwich College Playing fields, > Honor Oak Allotments. MOL designation does not > mean open to the public. That is true, but the important point is that it is Open Land and not Builtupon Land, it affects the character of the area. Once built upon it is lost forever, i would love to build upon Dulwich College playing fields but even if Dulwich College became somehow 'unsustainable i somewhat doubt i would be allowed to build upon it. This scheme must be resisted, if the club had gone bust and not bought as a potential development perhaps it would probably already be fan owned!

hear hear

Gosh, I'm really excited by the linear park (path) that they are proposing. I imagine that there will be a fence/ wall behind the goal so an even more appealing walk from Jags to DKH. This is such a painfully blatant case of development of public land for private profit that you could be excused for thinking we were in Lambeth.

my point was, MOL is MOL, its our MOL. If DHFC build on it it will no longer be MOL. Do we value that or not? I have experience in property development, that is why it is so easy to see what Hadley are doing. i dont know enough about the club to say whether they will survive if Hadley retire, my hunch, with the revived fortunes/ attendances of the club is yes. I just find all the Hadley statements a little galling as its nothing to do with 'space making' it is about building on MOL which is invaluable when there are loads of kids football clubs struggling to find pitches on a Sunday, Charter school is forced to rent a one crappy pitch from St Saviours and St Olaves.

The famous Danny does Saturday and holiday classes at Athenlay football club next to Harris Girls south of peckham rye

there is a reason its metropolitan open land, everyone is always talking about building over open space and what it does to grassroots sport etc. Are you saying that as long as it gives cash to the club then so be it? Hadley need to go away, realise that the punt isn't going to work and count their losses. All this nonsense about Hadley helping the club and the community is a smoke screen for brazen property development and they hope that the supporters and community at large will do their bidding for them.

Edited .

unfortunately they have taken a misguided punt on being able to convince the planners to allow them to build on Metropolitan Open Land and are using complete b-----ks language like 'linear park' to try and push through a money making scheme. They knew the risks before they got into it, lets just hope Southwark arent swayed by such crap and reject it. then Hadley can bugger off and leave a vibrant successful football club to get on with it.

I stand corrected, what a relief, looks like the club is in good hands then

what a disingenuous load of crap, Hadley want to make a load of cash by building houses, once they've trousered it you wont see them for dust.

err no, cos your car would be on the drive instead of the street and there is the residual 1/2 space, or am I missing something?

I think you might be wrong here James, this the advice from your planning department 'The proposal include extending the adjacent dropped kerb (crossover} to allow off-street parking. Works proposed do not require planning permission as it benefits from permitted development rights under The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, SCHEDULE 2, PART 2 MINOR OPERATIONS, Class B. Permitted development: "The formation, laying out and construction of a means of access to a highway which is not a trunk road or a classified road, where that access is required in connection with development permitted by any Class in this Schedule (other than by Class A of this Part)".'

i would recommend that if you really want your own surveyor that you suggest that your neighbour and you share one that you find, otherwise you run the risk of landing your neighbour with two bills potentially from two guys spinning out the work load. In my experience this can put a huge strain on neighbourly relations

I have thought for a while that a larger platform at Loughborough junction to link the three railways would a really good way of improving travel connections in this part of London and more capacity for Denmark Hill/ kings

Sorry James but you are coming at it from the wrong angle. the changes that you were forced to make were down to an extremely poor design in the first place. It being somewhat 'unpolishable' you have been forced to 'roll it in glitter' which costs money, and what we are left with is an extremely unsatisfactory urban addition that has cost you more than you would have liked. There are no shortcuts, a decent design should have been sought in the first place.