Lambeth: Let's churn up Clapham Common for profit! Up to 104 events per year planned

Discussion in 'Brixton' started by editor, Jul 4, 2017.

  1. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

    From Buzz:
    Lambeth Planning Committee to consider new powers allowing increased private events on Clapham Common
  2. sparkybird

    sparkybird ask the bird...

    I wonder exactly how much money Lambeth make from these events? While it's not great, if the money raised goes to support services which would otherwise be cut, then maybe it's a better thing??
  3. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

    Public parks aren't supposed to be money making machines for Lambeth, with large parts constantly fenced off for private events.
  4. Brainaddict

    Brainaddict chief propagandist (provisional)

    I have repeatedly tried to argue that it is bad for councils to be behaving like profit-seeking bodies (in the context of housing specifically) but it feels like the battle is lost. Most of the public seems to accept the argument that it's okay for councils to act for profit as long as that goes to fund public services. Sadly this is falling in line with what the Tories have been specifically pushing local authorities to do, and it's a shame more people don't wonder why it is we have 'public sector' bodies in the first place. They exist precisely because profit-seeking bodies don't act in a way that serves the public interest. In my opinion councils becoming profit-making is bound to undermine their ability to serve the public interest. In this case, as you point out, it makes the parks unavailable to most non-paying plebs for a lot of the time. I think it's very sad if people think this is acceptable just because the money then goes to fund public services - it's still a massive compromise in what councils are meant to be for.

    Also the central government should properly fund local authorities, and Labour councils in particular shouldn't be in such a hurry to concede the ground of whether or not they are properly funded.
    shygirl, tim, Casaubon and 5 others like this.
  5. bimble

    bimble noisy but small

    I was a bit surprised to learn recently that there is no legal obligation whatsoever to force local government to maintain parks and open spaces. They are not obliged to do anything at all by any law. I guess when they were created nobody imagined a time when these vital bits of the civic landscape would be left to somehow fend for themselves.
  6. sealion

    sealion Conscientious selector

  7. skyscraper101

    skyscraper101 0891 50 50 50

    104 events could mean year-round events if they are 3-4 days or more in length.

    I hope if it does go ahead, there'll at least be a few techno/hardcore dance festivals in amongst that.
  8. joustmaster

    joustmaster offcumdun

    I really don't see a problem with it. It's nice to have a park. It's nice to have these sorts of events.
    Last edited: Jul 4, 2017
    tim likes this.
  9. ricbake

    ricbake working out how

  10. ricbake

    ricbake working out how

    Public events in public parks are great - Allowing commercial operations to exclude the public from large parts of parks should not be to the detriment of the regular users.
    Jangleballix and editor like this.
  11. T & P

    T & P |-o-| (-o-) |-o-|

    To be fair, the largest private event I have seen in Clapham Common was unlikely to have taken up more than 5% of the total surface area of the place, leaving a whopping 95% of it still freely available to everyone. That's not going to be detrimental to anyone. Live and let live.
  12. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

    Well that and all the huge fencing, lighting, ancillary facilities, 24 hr security and the tens of thousand of people entering and leaving the park, flanked by opportunistic hot dog sellers etc.]

    SW4 festival certainly takes up more than 5% of the park.
    sealion and Gramsci like this.
  13. ricbake

    ricbake working out how

    The Common is about 200 acres - 5% is a big chunk of land
    Gramsci likes this.
  14. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

    Some of that common is woods, roads and a pond, but some of the festivals are pretty big and take a fair size bite out of the open land, and cause disruption over a much bigger area.

    ricbake likes this.
  15. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

    And for the record, I think a four or five big festivals every year are fair enough, although I'd naturally prefer them to be of the free community type. But 104 private events in a year? Nah, that's way too much.
    Gramsci likes this.
  16. T & P

    T & P |-o-| (-o-) |-o-|

    I'm guessing here as I don't have any official figures, but SW4 was the festival I had in mind when I suggested the most space any event in CC ever takes is about 5%.

    There is shit loads of space left in CC for everyone else to enjoy.

    But all of this is a moot point anyway, because the overwhelimg majority of these planned 104 events will of course be much smaller than SW4.
  17. dessiato

    dessiato Maholo e ke akua no kei la

    Although Clapham Common is not going to directly me, what worries me is that if it goes ahead here, how long before it happens elsewhere? How long before these public areas cease to be truly public?
    shygirl, Gramsci and editor like this.
  18. stockwelljonny

    stockwelljonny Wait here I have gone to get help

    London Squares Act 1931 specifically prevents councils from use of squares and parks that prevents public use and I gather was passed to make sure council's don't use for money making ventures at cost of public use. This is only reason Westminster doesn't have permanent champagne bars etc on the squares it owns, and is restricted in only using limited parts of Hyde park for summer concerts. Think the act only applies to central London borough so Lambeth not bound by it.

    Its really shit, bit by bit, these really precious public spaces get appropriated.
    Gramsci and bimble like this.
  19. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

    Even accepting this 5% figure, it would be naive to pretend that the remaining 95% of the park is completely unaffected by a massive 20,000 person festival taking place, with DJs and bands thumping out music, traffic going in and out of the park, vendors setting up outside etc.
  20. T & P

    T & P |-o-| (-o-) |-o-|

    Some visitors (though not all) will notice it for a festival of that size, yes.

    But then, it is almost certain that the overwhelming majority of those proposed 104 events will be much, much smaller than the likes of SW4. So very few, if any people will be inconvenienced at all.
  21. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

    Even the most sunny spin on these events would be hard pressed to conclude that no one would be inconvenience by a private, fenced off event taking place in the park.
  22. sparkybird

    sparkybird ask the bird...

    Well while we wait for that to happen, I can see why council are looking at ways to plug the financial gaps. My question was more about the cost effectiveness of these events in terms of revenue generated
  23. T & P

    T & P |-o-| (-o-) |-o-|

    Fine. Very few people would be inconvenienced. What can one do, other than cancel every single event if even if it is just a few individuals who object to them?

    Incidentally, if we're talking inconvenience, you can be sure a number of people are inconvenienced by other festivals and events that we're all fond of. And when it comes to inconvenience, it will matter not one iota to those people who don't like the event whether it is public or private, paid or free, fenced or not fenced. So you if you are going to champion the opinions and feelings of every park user and local resident over the right of a festival to go ahead, I'm afraid we're going to have to do away with absolutely every last one.
  24. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

    Has anyone suggested that? Nope. But do I think a public park should regularly - as in every week or so - be fencing off (sometimes substantial) areas for private, paid-for parties? No, I don't.
    shygirl likes this.
  25. T & P

    T & P |-o-| (-o-) |-o-|

    Fair enough, it's your opinion and a valid one. I'm just saying the majority of such events are very unlikely to take much space at all, and in fact the overwhelming majority of park users are unlikely to come across them, let alone much care.
  26. FridgeMagnet

    FridgeMagnet Administrator

    Bear in mind here that the majority of events will be taking place over weekends, given that that's the time most people are free and also the time when they are most likely to want to go to the park. So this is almost like saying there could be an event on every day, and that's assuming one day events too.
    editor, ddraig and Gramsci like this.
  27. Gramsci

    Gramsci Well-Known Member

    Sorry did I miss something?Where is evidence that events won't take up much space? Or is this just your opinion based on no evidence?
    editor likes this.
  28. stockwelljonny

    stockwelljonny Wait here I have gone to get help

    Fucks up the grass for long periods outside days of actual festival use. The part of Hyde Park used for the summer festival is hoarded off for large part of the year to let fucked grass recover.
    editor and ddraig like this.
  29. T & P

    T & P |-o-| (-o-) |-o-|

    SW4 is a large festival designed to attract tens of thousands of people. There aren't that many events in the UK, let alone London, that require that much space or attract that many people. So unless every such festival in the UK is relocating to Clapham, you can be quite sure that the great majority of the 104 events suggested will be much smaller.

    Never mind that the total turn around time of events of the size of SW4 is easily 10 days+, so good luck fitting in 104 such events in 52 weeks.

    Think about it.
  30. ddraig

    ddraig dros ben llestri

    grass where they put the camp for the champions league final in Cardiff not expected to be sorted and ready til November!! massive part of park fucked for months for 1 footie match
    stockwelljonny and editor like this.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice