Greenwich 2012, please read this.

C

christinao

Well-Known Member
Joined
20 March 2007
Messages
92
Visit site
I know this is a contraversial subject but as someone brought it up on another thread, I feel justified to bring it up. Please read the report on the attached link and please for the sake of the Park, its heritage and the future of horseport in the Olympics, lets all stop being romnantic and get behind a change of venue. I nearly cried when i read this, what the reality of having the olympic equestrian in the park means, the misery for the residents, the tree 'pruning' and how some parts will only be preserved 'only as a record'. I have never made a big speech on this subject before but yesterday i went to London to see the Turner exhibiton at the tate and i looked at his painting of Greenwich Park and although the skyline behind the queens house has changed and few trees been lost in storms, the view of the park is almost unchanged. How awful that we should have such a low regard for a world heritage site. can you imagine the french doing the same to the Bois or the Tulleries (sp?).
frown.gif
frown.gif


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersp...mpic-works.html
 
I agree with Pippa Cuckson that Hickstead would be an ideal venue - it only needs an update in terms of grandstand provision, the rest is there already with the dressage and the start of a X-country course AND it's within easy reach of London down the A23. However, I seem to remember that when Hickstead was originally suggested as the obvious choice for the equestrian events, the IOC said that that it could use the site because "it was privately owned". Hmm, so the fact that England/Britain would have then had a world-class venue which could host events such as the WEG doesn't matter????

Worlds fail me on the thinking in this country and that includes the rape of a World Heritage Site too. . . . . and could someone please explain just why it will be necessary to close Greenwich Plark for FIVE years????
 
it says why in the document if you can be bothered to wade through it. mainly after the park has been trashed by the public and the lorry traffic and all, that is how long it will take for the grass etc to be reseeded and recover, although obviously that will still be without all the rare species and things that are currently part of it.
 
it should be held at Windsor. fantastic backdrop, close to London, could become a permanent fixture, not a f***ing HUGE waste of money.
poor Greenwich park. i'm disgusted by the fact that they are persisting with this disastrous idea.
 
Friend is MD the Observatory and this is not the story I have heard. I have heard how superb its going to be. Even now I have been told not to read what is in the press as it is not frankly all true. I am going to trust this friend as they are on the inside track.

Frankly all the press runs are negative stories in the lead up to the Olympics - time and time again with eventing be it about Los Angeles, Atlanta, Athens, Beijing etc etc Its no wonder they want to boot Equestrianism out of the Olympics. Frankly I do not care about a lasting legacy if we get the numbers and press attention due to being in the centre of London. Eventing is one of the first sports off and gold could change the publics perception about it.
 
[ QUOTE ]
it says why in the document if you can be bothered to wade through it. mainly after the park has been trashed by the public and the lorry traffic and all, that is how long it will take for the grass etc to be reseeded and recover, although obviously that will still be without all the rare species and things that are currently part of it.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's a really ill-informed view-point - there will be a seed bank in the soil of the the rare species, and often heavily managed places like Greenwich Park are actually not as floristically diverse as they could be due to the management regime - they are often regularly mown and there is little opportunity for things to set seed. Often, something happening which looks like it is trashing the place can actually serve to provide opportunities for the flora to regenerate from the seedbank without the competition from the very successful grass species. Add to that the fact that if something is properly rare then it is legally protected in a number of different ways, and the fact that it is perfectly possible (and pretty common place) to collect seed prior to digging somewhere up, store it (I have some from a site which has been in storage for over 5 years and is still viable - there are specialist companies which do it), then use it to reseed, and it isn't all as doom and gloom as it could be. If the rare species are animals then there will be a lot of hoops to jump through to destroy their habitat and replacements will have to be provided. Seedbanks can survive for decades in the soil, and one event like this can be all it takes to see a dramatic increase in diversity.

PS I'm a professional ecologist with an MSc in Restoration Ecology, so I really do know what I am talking about on this one....
smile.gif
 
Lec, this is not a press story. if you open the second link all of this is in the document presented to the planners which you can download and read yourself.
Your friend has probably been lied to like everyone else by LOGOE as this document which they have written and presented themselves, contradicts nearly everything they have said so far and entirely backs up everything the opposition have been saying.
Please please read the original document, it is public like all planning applications and take your head out of the sand.
How can you not be worried about the lack of lasting legacy when that is going to mean a complete waste of nearly 30 million of public money (at last estimate) and by their own admission completely wreck a world heritage site to the point that some of it will only be remembered 'only as record'.
That is so arrogant and shows a total inability to read and understand the facts presented. Again I say to you, the Telegraph etc are only commenting on a public document presented to the planning commitee by LOGOE. This is not negative press or scare mongering, this is the actual reality.
For one, can you imagine the lives of the residents with the lovely security fence to look at out of their front windows not to mention the high powered lighting being placed upon it, which will be there for at least three months.
it is this attitude that gives horse people their bad name and with it, there is little to be surprised about that horse sport featured so little in sundays sports personality awards.
 
Sptted Cat i do not doubt your credentials but this is what the LOGOE planning application says itself. Not the press, not the opposition, the organisers. They are going to trash the park to the point they, by their own admission, cannot restore it.
any way in your profession and as a horse person, you should know that you cannot entirely restore virgin turf that has been undisturbed for 500 years no matter how many seed banks you have, and that even to try will need the time frame as described in the document.
Also trees cannot grow new branches just like that and the 'pruning' mention in the document is extensive, particularly i should think at the southern end of the park where there is an area with firs and such that have very low branches.
 
Next time I see friend which will possibly be over Christmas then I will ask the precise detail as I know she has been attending regular meetings on everything and has already toured the stadium sites etc.

My head is not in the sand but everytime with the Olympics this feeling of Deja Vu about the eventing comes up with the site, weather, location etc not being enough.
 
Believe me, there is a lot of weight given to ecological issues these days, and if it really was going to trash an irreplaceable, high quality resource, then it would be very difficult to get it through planning.
 
No way should Hickstead have it - Hickstead's a bit of an embarrassment at the moment - seating, facilities and car parking wise. And the A23 is not an easy travel road. It's not even accessible by public transport.

100% agree with Kerelli - it should be at Windsor, no where else.
 
Agree with Kerilli - along with many others, I have said since the start that this should be at Windsor. What the hell is wrong with these psople - it's been totally b---y obvious from the beginning that Greeenwich was a thoroughly illogical choice. They are now just being cussed and refusing to do anything that might make them lose face.

This money, invested in redeveloping an existing site, could give us yet another world-class venue - a permanent one, with no loss of amenity to London.
 
Sptted cat, if you read Pippa Cuckson's report you would see that is exactly what she is saying and that because it is an olympics the planning comittee will be forced to approve a plan that in any other circumstance would be turned down. At which point by the way, there will probably have to be a juducial review as this approval will break several laws pertaining to the uase of the Park.
Some of you that are so hell bent on supporting a plan that will destroy a UNESCO world heritage site (wont that make the Brits look good) might actually read LOGOE's application and see how much they have lied to everyone over the last couple of years to gain this support.
For example you might care to think about he welfare of any injured horses. They will not be able to build a facility like thwy had in Athens, Hong Kong or Sydney. any seriously injured horses will need to be transported elsewhere. I am tld the nearest place is Bell Equine which is at least on a direct route from Greenwich, all the other possibilities involve significant journeys round the M25 or through London.
 
[ QUOTE ]

For example you might care to think about he welfare of any injured horses. They will not be able to build a facility like thwy had in Athens, Hong Kong or Sydney. any seriously injured horses will need to be transported elsewhere. I am tld the nearest place is Bell Equine which is at least on a direct route from Greenwich, all the other possibilities involve significant journeys round the M25 or through London.

[/ QUOTE ]

Damned good point!!
 
The ground at Windsor was always a great problem when they had the 3 day event there at the end of May so later in the summer it would be even harder. In many areas of the park they are not allowed to work on the ground so it can't be improved. When it's not hard it's bottomless hence the several cancellations of the event. Windsor may be suitable for the dressage and show jumping but it's not great for the 3 day event.
 
Re: ground - there are enough sandy tracks in that park to put a xc course on.

To be honest, if in the small likelihood we have a hot summer in 2012, surely Greenwich will be pretty hard too?
 
[ QUOTE ]
The ground at Windsor was always a great problem when they had the 3 day event there at the end of May so later in the summer it would be even harder. In many areas of the park they are not allowed to work on the ground so it can't be improved - When it's not hard it's bottomless hence the several cancellations of the event. Windsor may be suitable for the dressage and show jumping but it's not great for the 3 day event.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know they have had problems in the past with the ground Oldvic and, certainly as it is, it couldn't be relied upon to provide a great XC venue. My point is that, with the amount of money being ploughed into this, it could be rectified once and for all, even if this means relocating part (s) of the XC course. with long term benefits for the sport and without leaving Greenwich in a mess for years.
 
I am a Greenwich resident and have been to a number of the meetings and have kept involved as much as possible. I have very little time for Andrew Gilligan and his self serving scare mongering. I also am disappointed that there won’t be an equestrian legacy but we are where we are and I am delighted that I will able to be part of such an amazing experience.


Many residents are very excited to be part of hosting such a fantastic event and do understand that some areas of the park may be closed from time to time but ultimately it won't have a massive impact. I actually use the park every day to walk my dogs so I will be in a first hand position to see what's going on.


The residents are used to big disruptive events such as the London Marathon which has some 36,000 people stomping all over the park and running along its roads. Blackheath fireworks attracts 100,000 people to the heath. The heath regularly hosts circuses and fairs which use large lorries and host crowd parking, in fact as I look out of my window I can see one set up today.


The legacy for Greenwich isn’t horse related but it is great for the residents, http://www.greenwich.gov.uk/Greenwich/2012Games/OlympicNews/OlympicCountdownCelebrations.htm

I particularly like one local’s view that “the Olympics are an opportunity, not a threat, and that it is not “Our Park”: it belongs to the nation, and had been lent to us. “The least we can do is to lend it to the world for a short while for such a momentous event – even if it involves a bit of inconvenience.”
 
I'm in favour of Windsor as well or perhaps Blenheim. The site at Greenwich is too small and the park is going to be lost to residents for a ridiculous amount of time.
 
Pootler, i am sure you are very earnest and believe everything you have been told so far but please look at the second link above and, never mind what Andrew Gilligan says about it, read the document the is LOGOE's own planning application. Like everyone else, the residents have been lied to about a great many things. how can anyone be prepared to allow the wanton destruction of the Park as written in their own document. My family is all South London born and bred (all of us were born at Kings) and both my brothers live within a spit of the park, are non horsey and are horrified at this latest document. My sister who lives in Woolwich, is already under no illusions about the amount of congestion there will be from the relocating of the shooting but she can live with that as it will only be for a short time (no test event even if Para's shoot it will only be a month or so) but the park will be closed for years, let alone any other considerations. Can you not understand the phrase "will only be preserved as record"? That means not LOGOE either cannot or will not restore some aspects of the area that they will destroy.
I have been to two public meetings, one in Greenwich and one outside London with a high powered member of LOGOE as speaker and until i read the planning application I was nearly convinced myself that all the objections were scaremongering as you put it.
It now seems to me Pootler that persons who still support this, having had the full extent of the plan revealed in this document, are doing so for some unexplained and selfish reason because there is not a single one that can now be put forward to justify the damage that will be done to a world heritage site, that has been dear to Londoners and untouched in a great many ways for 500 years.
Once again I urge you to read the planning appplication and see for yourself. if you still then continue to hold the same view, then i must assume you do not have the wits to understand plain english.
 
Oh and pootler the events you mention do not bear comparison. The London marathon only last a few hours itself and the road closures etc a few hours more. the fairs on Blackheath (which my brother can also see from his window) do not require landscaping, digging up great swaths of ground, security fences and closing the heath for months at a time. please just read the planning aplication instead of selfishly thinking how fine it will be wo watch olympic xc out of the front room window.
 
Unless we all think that the people who run equestrian sport in the UK and at FEI level are a complete bunch of morons, maybe we should reflect on why they have made this choice.

Whether we as equestrians like it or not, we participate in an expensive sport mostly enjoyed by those of European descent. I doubt any of the equestrian disciplines would be admitted to the olympics if they applied now. My understanding is that the FEI are seeking to retain the olympic status by evolving to meet the needs of emerging states. Note: use to work for a non olympic sports governing body who want to join.

Holding the crosscountry on city parkland demonstrates that a non equestrian country does not need to provide permanent facilities. At the end of the day, many countries would probably support scrapping eventing, or replacing it with another stadium discipline such as reigning.

Whilst Burghley would be those convenient venue for me, I consider it important that following Beijing/Hong Kong, equestrian sport should be located at the heart of the olympic venue.

The veterinary cover is being provided by Greenwood Ellis who have just built a world class horse hospital in Newmarket. I admit I'm a bit confused on the logistics of how they will treat an acutely sick horse.

OP, I noticed you have made a lot of 2012 posts.
 
Also how does Melbourne manage to hold a 4* in the city park every year and not manage to cause this kind of damage that you refer to? I know that from talking to people the eventing in the city increases crowd capacity and makes the event more special.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Sptted cat, if you read Pippa Cuckson's report you would see that is exactly what she is saying and that because it is an olympics the planning comittee will be forced to approve a plan that in any other circumstance would be turned down. At which point by the way, there will probably have to be a juducial review as this approval will break several laws pertaining to the uase of the Park.


[/ QUOTE ]

Pippa Cuckson is, as mentioned, an equestrian journalist. Her job is to help sell publications. She is not a planning officer, or an ecologist or a planning inspector. Therefore I think I will take what she says with a pinch of salt and base my judgments on what I know of the planning system in this country, of my experiences with not only planning inspectors but the European courts when England has tried to ignore or implement EU directives or international legislation incorrectly and not on an article which must have an angle in order for her to be doing her job. I've sat through planning inquiries (dull) and seen things taken to judicial review, and done expert witness work with barristers, I do think I have a good understanding of how the process works in England. I am currently working on a site which is remediating a highly contaminated site in a UNESCO World Heritage Site - the development itself is not controversial, or particularly in the public eye (aside from locally), it will only benefit the surrounding area - but the clients have jumped through hoop after hoop to get planning permission, been to judicial review, modified their plans time and again - and they are not building on anything except a car park! So I have some faith that the planning inspectors are not in fact corrupt enough to let something through which breaches legislation and destroys a World Heritage Site or things of ecological value. Perhaps I feel safer with it because I understand and work within the system?
 
if you dont mind me saying I dont think Pippa Cuckson is casting doubt on the integrity of the planning committee, just saying they will under much pressure. which they will be. And also I should think that she is quite aware of the process involved. Which for an Olympic Games is not always as straight forward as other planning applications in any country. Or otherwise we would not be having this discussion as using Greenwich breaks the terms of the charter by which it was left to the public and also thae agreement with UNESCO and World Heritage.
personally i am easy either way about its use, I dont live anywhere near it and will be watching on TV! Anyway as far as i can see from all the above links it is only the crosscountry course that is causing all the real opposition. Why cant they use Blackheath it self for that? it is right next door. Or Richmond. that would only be a short lorry ride, no worse than the one in Hong Kong. Or Brockwell Park even closer to greenwhich although sadly not such a great view! Or Crystal Palace Park, very close to Greenwich and the best view in South London. Seems to me there are many alternatives without doing all the damage that planning application admits it will do.
 
QR: did not mean to imply that PC was casting doubt on the integrity of the planning committee - though i can see how it could be read like that. It was more the fact that others on this thread seem to think that the planning application will be rubber-stamped through - I disagree with that notion, though only time will tell.
 
ok. and incidentally to whoever it was that mentioned Melbourne, they manage because that park is a permenent sports facility, although not particularly for horses.
 
The problem with Windsor is not that previous organisers wouldn't do anything with the ground but that they weren't allowed to. The park authorities have very strict laws. It is a clay based soil which does not lend itself to sufficient improvement. Some soil bases are better suited to producing good ground i.e. Barbury which produces brilliant ground in any weather with a lot of hard work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top