GALA 2025

[Dulwitch]

I was at both meetings. Frankly I think there's little point to them. Gala's licence was granted in perpetuity, they make all the right noises but they are totally disinterested in the problems and damage they inflict.

The map fails to include the area of park which will be set aside for a Lime bike parking area which is to be expanded this year and the area used for the Park run start/finish is within the new expanded footprint.

They said there were no plans to cut down any trees BUT one has been felled near the pedestrian gate in Colyton road which would obstruct the proposed HGV track. A replacement has been planted a few metres away but that doesn't excuse cutting down a beautiful established tree. Agree that the ecological survey is utterly worthless as are a lot of other statements in the consultation documents. The 21 day timeframe doesn't include loss of space due to remedial works or the fencing off for reseeded grass to grow...which is destroyed again less than a year later. The bund and meadow planting will be inside the boundary fencing. I doubt it will survive unscathed.

. 

[first mate]

If trees are being removed to facilitate event trackway and vehicle movement that is worrying and flies in the face of Southwark's alleged environmental concerns.

I take it, the tree pictured above was not diseased?

 

[alice]

as the new tree is so close to the felled tree your conclusion does not seem likely. but i would like to know what is the logic behind moving the vehicle entry point from the sensible forest hill rd location to the proposed one up by the girls school cutting through and damaging the park at great expense.

[sunbob]

21 minutes ago, alice said:

as the new tree is so close to the felled tree your conclusion does not seem likely. but i would like to know what is the logic behind moving the vehicle entry point from the sensible forest hill rd location to the proposed one up by the girls school cutting through and damaging the park at great expense.

It's because large vehicles can not now enter there without damaging the new bunds.

[alice]

Bunds?

[d walker]

1 hour ago, alice said:

Bunds?

The flood allievation bunds created in the park where the Gala used to enter the festival site

[alice]

Poor thinking 

[first mate]

I would suggest that this is now an unsuitable site for this event. Not only are they now extending the length of the event but changing of the entrance/ access may have a much greater detrimental impact on the park environment and on other park users.

By allowing this, can the council really claim to be green?

Edited February 8 by first mate

[Kate Honey]

I still have had no reply from Daniel the ‘Head of Sustainability’ at Gala, would recommend emailing [email protected] as well as filling in the survey 

[alice]

The closing date from the survey is in two days. 

[Dulwich dweller]

13 hours ago, first mate said:

I would suggest that this is now an unsuitable site for this event. Not only are they now extending the length of the event but changing of the entrance/ access may have a much greater detrimental impact on the park environment and on other park users.

By allowing this, can the council really claim to be green?

They seem to think that it's residents are green. As in naive that is given the amount of dishonesty and cobblers that they come out with. Its like buzzword bingo. Sustainable, organic, green, stake holders, local jobs blah blah blah. Absolute cobblers and box ticking.

[sunbob]

The consultation is open until midnight today.  Thank you to previous posters who gave the link to the survey:
https://engage.southwark.gov.uk/en-GB/projects/galaseries2025

And who advised us to also email our responses to the Licensing Team on:
[email protected]

I have now done both of these things.  Please feel free to copy and paste anything you agree with from my response, which is below, if you are able to send a response to Southwark today:

The proposal is invalid:
Southwark council's Outdoor Event Policy states that "Applications for major events must be submitted a minimum of nine months prior to the event start date.", which would have been August 29th 2024 for this application. 
This proposal was published only 4 months in advance. 

The proposal is inaccurate:
It is stated that 'only 12.4% of the park and common will be out of use'. This is the same figure that was used last year, which cannot be accurate since a large amount of extra space will be enclosed by the new trackway.

The proposal is a danger to the health,  education and outcomes of children and young people at Harris girls secondary and Harris sixth-form:
The location of the proposed vehicle entrance would bring high numbers of large and polluting vehicles (many with poor sight-lines to passing pedestrians and cyclists) next  to the Harris girls and Harris sixth-form site. This will be extremely physically dangerous, with vastly increased risk of road accidents both at the beginning and end of the school day and throughout the school day (due to sixth formers travelling independently between sights through the day).
Secondly; pollution and noise into the school site will be increased, damaging pupils physical and mental health.
Thirdly (and just as importantly); increased noise and pollution will be very damaging to those sitting GCSE and A level exams at Harris Girls and Sixth-form during the proposal's timeline.

The proposal is a danger to public health:
Polluting petrol and diesel driven motor vehicles will be using the new trackway 12 hours a day  throughout the project, directly next to several busy sports pitches.

The proposal is a danger to mature trees:
The crown of the much loved mature cherry tree in sector S15 of the site plan is far too close to the path of the new trackway and is not tall, so is likely to be damaged  by passing medium and high sided vehicles. (Please remember that last year branches of this tree were cut off by the applicant because they got in the way of their fence, rather than shaping the fence around it. They have earned a reputation for not being careful with trees).
2 other mature trees are also in danger.  Buildings are placed directly next to the trunks of those in sector 8K and 8J of the site plan. Lower branches to approximately half or a third of the way up these trees would have to be removed in order to make space for them.

The proposal is dishonest:
The applicant claims to want to provide an extra day for the 'community'. In reality the main,  long term outcome of extending the event by a third (ie adding an extra day) will be to set the president of it being a 4 day festival and also making it easier to add more extra days in future years.

The plot of land is no longer appropriate for such an event (if it ever was)-
The spot used for a vehicle entrance in previous years (by the cycle path to the north west corner) is no longer usable, due to potential damage to the new flood alleviation bunds. And the proposed replacement gate and trackway are inappropriate for all the reasons listed above. 

[CPR Dave]

If you're copying and pasting that ^ make sure to spell check it. I think "sights" should be "sites".

[sunbob]

Good thinking.  I'm definitely not claiming to be an excellent speller or grammar user.

[PickledPorcupine]

On 10/02/2025 at 09:14, sunbob said:

The consultation is open until midnight today.  Thank you to previous posters who gave the link to the survey:
https://engage.southwark.gov.uk/en-GB/projects/galaseries2025

And who advised us to also email our responses to the Licensing Team on:
[email protected]

I have now done both of these things.  Please feel free to copy and paste anything you agree with from my response, which is below, if you are able to send a response to Southwark today:

The proposal is invalid:
Southwark council's Outdoor Event Policy states that "Applications for major events must be submitted a minimum of nine months prior to the event start date.", which would have been August 29th 2024 for this application. 
This proposal was published only 4 months in advance. 

The proposal is inaccurate:
It is stated that 'only 12.4% of the park and common will be out of use'. This is the same figure that was used last year, which cannot be accurate since a large amount of extra space will be enclosed by the new trackway.

The proposal is a danger to the health,  education and outcomes of children and young people at Harris girls secondary and Harris sixth-form:
The location of the proposed vehicle entrance would bring high numbers of large and polluting vehicles (many with poor sight-lines to passing pedestrians and cyclists) next  to the Harris girls and Harris sixth-form site. This will be extremely physically dangerous, with vastly increased risk of road accidents both at the beginning and end of the school day and throughout the school day (due to sixth formers travelling independently between sights through the day).
Secondly; pollution and noise into the school site will be increased, damaging pupils physical and mental health.
Thirdly (and just as importantly); increased noise and pollution will be very damaging to those sitting GCSE and A level exams at Harris Girls and Sixth-form during the proposal's timeline.

The proposal is a danger to public health:
Polluting petrol and diesel driven motor vehicles will be using the new trackway 12 hours a day  throughout the project, directly next to several busy sports pitches.

The proposal is a danger to mature trees:
The crown of the much loved mature cherry tree in sector S15 of the site plan is far too close to the path of the new trackway and is not tall, so is likely to be damaged  by passing medium and high sided vehicles. (Please remember that last year branches of this tree were cut off by the applicant because they got in the way of their fence, rather than shaping the fence around it. They have earned a reputation for not being careful with trees).
2 other mature trees are also in danger.  Buildings are placed directly next to the trunks of those in sector 8K and 8J of the site plan. Lower branches to approximately half or a third of the way up these trees would have to be removed in order to make space for them.

The proposal is dishonest:
The applicant claims to want to provide an extra day for the 'community'. In reality the main,  long term outcome of extending the event by a third (ie adding an extra day) will be to set the president of it being a 4 day festival and also making it easier to add more extra days in future years.

The plot of land is no longer appropriate for such an event (if it ever was)-
The spot used for a vehicle entrance in previous years (by the cycle path to the north west corner) is no longer usable, due to potential damage to the new flood alleviation bunds. And the proposed replacement gate and trackway are inappropriate for all the reasons listed above. 

Very cute stencil, bless. Sadly for you, there is a similar stencil in support that is being shared around the kids socials, you know how glued to their phones they are, well there is likely to be hundreds of these that have made their way to the council. 

To cut a long story short- the festival is going ahead and it sounds like it will be bigger than ever. It would be better for your health just to let it go, and try to imagine that people gathering to enjoy music in an open space is not the end of the world. 

[Dulwich dweller]

14 hours ago, PickledPorcupine said:

Very cute stencil, bless. Sadly for you, there is a similar stencil in support that is being shared around the kids socials, you know how glued to their phones they are, well there is likely to be hundreds of these that have made their way to the council. 

To cut a long story short- the festival is going ahead and it sounds like it will be bigger than ever. It would be better for your health just to let it go, and try to imagine that people gathering to enjoy music in an open space is not the end of the world. 

Luckily I'm at the bottom of the Rye in the Gardens so fortunately not too put out by the noise. I doubt it's very pleasant if you live closer. My issue is about the councils seemingly underhand way of communicating and dealing with local residents concerns and opinions. Basically these type of events go ahead regardless. That to me is a bit snide, dishonest and not how a council should treat its residents. There's a fair bit of damage done to the park and all for the benefit/ profit of a private company and PR consultants/ professional bullshitters.

[fishboy]

It's not the end of the world, no, and I don't think anyone's got anything against people gathering to enjoy music in an open space. But people having zero care or consideration for that open space and a private company not honouring their responsibilities is the real issue. Excluding local families from the best area in the park for a month, then leaving it as a littered wasteland for the rest of the summer really isn't acceptable, is it? And just to make it clear what is left behind...

[first mate]

And that photo flies in the face of any claim our council makes to being green and a environmentally aware- it is all empty rhetoric on their part and deeply cynical.