| # | Name | Comments |
|---|
| 151 | Laura Osgood | |
| 152 | Mark Richardson | |
| 153 | Karen O'Kane | |
| 154 | Dawn Gibson | I walked round the park this Saturday with my the first time, it is so stunningly beautiful, gorgeous lakes, and trees. In my opinion the most beautiful park in London.
The LDA should be ashamed of themselves, its bad enough selling off our greenbelt, but our park land, we have so little green spaces in London. As a 40% tax payer, and a ful and sole council tax payer in the area I am disgusted at the proposal. |
| 155 | John Alflatt | Completly opposed to loseing any of the park for any reason. There will always be funding problems and if a section of park is sold each time, it will gradually be eroded. The population is increasing and we must keep all green spaces intact for future generations. |
| 156 | Frances Plummer | It isof great concern to me that you plan to include housing in the masterplan: - that is,a four storey block at Sydenham Gate and a five storey block at Rockhills. I believe that this sets a dangerous precedent of selling off parkland for housing,allegedly to finance improvements. |
| 157 | susan miller | i am a local resident, who is totally opposed to the building of private houses and flats on public parkland. if this goes ahead, who knows where it will end. |
| 158 | Anonymous | give it back to the GLC |
| 159 | Sally Ratcliffe | I strongly oppose selling off any part of the park for residential or private development in principle. Any development must pertain to facilities suitable to a park. This latest attempt affects me personally since I live close to the Sydenham Gate entrance and this proposal will deprive me of a huge chunk of my closest parkland. Crystal Palace Park road is already too busy without what will effectively be another side road churning cars out. |
| 160 | James Poole | We pay the council to maintain this public park, from our council tax.
If they sell off some of it, do we get any money or pay less council tax?
No? Get your hands off our land then. |
| 161 | mikepinks | A 100% no brainer this: No to yuppy housing and yes to restoring the pride and focus to south london that a new crystal palace would bring. |
| 162 | Kate Vineall | I live near the park and use it regularly. For Southwark and Lambeth residents it is a valuable open space. I strongly disapprove of building on London's remaining open spaces. London Borough of Bromley no doubt feel that many of their residents are not interested in the park as it is on their northern boundary. If so, perhaps it should be administered by those boroughs representing taxpayers who actually do value it and use it. |
| 163 | Jonna Saarinen | |
| 164 | David Wynd | |
| 165 | joan casey | I strongly obect to the proposed private development of Crystal Palace Park |
| 166 | Elaine Jones | |
| 167 | Anonymous | |
| 168 | Mrs Sherrie Mills | I lived on Crystal Palace Park Road from 1976-2004, I bought my property in 1986, my daughter still lives in this property, so between us we have been living in the area for 32 years. We strongly object to the development plans of blocks of flats and modern houses in our Grade 11 listed park. The park is for the use of the public and should be protected that's why it was made a listed park. You can't sell off chunks of public property for the use of private developers. It should be against the law. If it is not then why not?
Yours sincerely
Mrs Sherrie Mills |
| 169 | Jay McNamara | |
| 170 | Joshua Anderson | I live on Lawrie Park Gardens. Stop this outrage! |
| 171 | Robert Witts | |
| 172 | Terence Smith | |
| 173 | Anonymous | Housing in an historic park is not acceptable and is not the route to 'revitalise' a park. In the case of Crystal Palace Park, the listed structures should be sympathetically repaired as a priority, seeking funding from appropriate sources. Commercial developments - whether housing, hotel, retail - are not the way forward and cannot provide funding, since they themselves have a huge 'cost'. Such an idea is very short sighted and a hazard to the future of all historic parks. |
| 174 | Anonymous | Housing in an historic park is not acceptable and is not the route to 'revitalise' a park. In the case of Crystal Palace Park, the listed structures should be sympathetically repaired as a priority, seeking funding from appropriate sources. Commercial developments - whether housing, hotel, retail - are not the way forward and cannot provide funding, since they themselves have a huge 'cost'. Such an idea is very short sighted and a hazard to the future of all historic parks. |
| 175 | N. Darsley | Please leave the park alone! |
| 176 | Debbie Head | I am appalled that people cannot leave CPP alone, it was already ruined years ago when they took everything out of the park and kept the lakeside bit closed for 2-3 years whilst work was going on. FLATS should not be built in a park and the MOL restriction should not be lifted. Protect our London parks from the LDA. |
| 177 | Kerryjo May | |
| 178 | Ian Soady | Crystal Palace Park is a beautiful open space and is a fantastic resource for the local area. It should not be compromised by the building of housing or commercial properties. |
| 179 | Jonna Saarinen | |
| 180 | David Wynd | |
| 181 | Stefania Maureddu | I live in Sydenham Hill and I believe it would be outrageous to build such a development in a beautiful historical area like Crystal Palace Park. |
| 182 | Yashin Mahamoodally | I object to building any residential propoerties on crystal palace park and I believe that the majority of residents in the area would share this view. London is losing too much of its open green spaces and I do not think the regeneration of the park should be funded by selling it off to private investors whose sole aim is to satisfy its shareholders. |
| 183 | Anthony Stoker | let's keep green spaces green!
surely there's industrial wasteland somewhere, that can be used for housing. |
| 184 | Peter Runacres | Its outrageous that the Mayor of London could even contemplate selling part of a park, let alone one that is grade two listed. What next more hotels on Park Lane but this time part of Hyde Park ?? Its a scandal and must not be allowed to set a precedent |
| 185 | Anonymous | |
| 186 | Anonymous | I feel that by building houses on the crystal palace park land would ruin the park, the area and have a negative effect on the area. |
| 187 | Ian Wright | As a local resident I am against these plans. |
| 188 | Nick Goy | I hope that the replacement of Ken Livingstone with Boris Johnson as mayor of London, on a green manifesto for protected open space in London will result in a dircetion to the LDA and TfL to withdraw the planning application and abandon proposals to build 180 private flats on parkalnd and protected open space, a Croydon tram extension through parkland, destroying trees and ornamental gardens on Anerely Hill, loss of parkland to Capel manor College proposed 5-storey teaching / residential accomodation, ill-thought out excavations/incursions into the Italian terrace, ugly block-like unornamented huge greenhouses on the open Italian Terrace, a grid-like monoculture tree planting and 500-place overflow parking on the hilltop, increase in built development of the National Sports Centre, a tree-top walk resemembling a monorail structure, an ugly so-called cricket pavilion, bizarre replacement cafe/boat house, removal of park railings, all-night lighting and other unsympathetic built development in the Park. |
| 189 | Cameron Christie | |
| 190 | lenny bignell | |
| 191 | anita bignell | |
| 192 | Anonymous | This would have a devastating effect because it would effect the whole charactar and wildlife in that area. |
| 193 | Claire Braybrook | |
| 194 | Mrs. Stephanie Margaret Lodge | Dear Sirs and Madams,
I absolutely object to any residential development on Crystal Palace Park, even for the perceived funding of the Park. This proposal does not meet MOL criteria. MOL criteria only covers cultural and recreational criteria as a designation not a means of care and future management plan for the Park.
Parks are for people, not just those who live in the immediate vicinity of the area but from further afield for mental, physical, spiritual and general well being of the general public as well as being areas of beauty, biodiversity and green lungs as an antidote to noise and air pollution.
They are also even more valuable now than before as more people are expected to move to the area.
If housing is allowed to go ahead it will set a very bad precedent for, not only Crystal Palace Park, but all our Parks. All Parks are for People, not for dwellings for private citizens. What is even worse is, that not one of these private dwellings is for social housing, it is all for the top income bracket, even then social housing allocation in the Park would not improve the Park for local and neighbouring communities.
I would ask for the housing proposals to be withdrawn from the Master Plan immediately.
Yours faithfully,
Mrs. S. M. Lodge |
| 195 | David Harbage | It is unfair on future generations to succumb to the greed of the current generation by cashing in on vital open spaces. Families need areas like this to build memories and raise the next generation.
Please, please, please ensure that the history of Crystal Palace is not tarnished anymore than it already is and restore the park to its former glory. |
| 196 | Susan Irvine | disgraceful to even consider building housing on parkland to make Bromley council money when we pay astronomical council tax for all their planning meeting food and drink sessions as it is. |
| 197 | Kate Morgan | |
| 198 | Stephen Tabberner | |
| 199 | Carla Saunders | Parks are what makes an area special and an area where people want to live and grow up and old in.
Preserve and improve the green space. |
| 200 | James Binks | I live in Sydenham (Highclere St) and use the park regularly for jogging and walking. It is a rare decent-sized green space in a very built up area and not one inch of it should be lost to private development |