please empty your brain below
|
I am against and for, for some of the reasons you have stated.
The principle benefit is obviously the enlarged park. but specifically the means to walk around the lake,it just being publicly viewable from the east and north at present, and from what are mainly car parks; this will be a great amenity.
The major loss are the trees. There was a 99 year old lady on the news last night saying that the real number is 800, and not 300. She lives in a flat overlooking this verdant landscape, and has already selected the tree she will be chaining herself to.
The most perplexing development is the creation of Court 0. Which matches will be played there? It will suck more big names from the outside courts for 8,000 premium price sales. As the third largest will it rank between Court 1 and Court 2, or heaven forbid a restructuring of the numbers takes place.
This new Court is also positioned a long way away (relatively speaking) from the existing facilities. It will need a lonely trek to see games there. Will they close the main road throughout the tournament? In order for this to make sense, I can see them redeveloping the main site with fewer courts and then build more outside courts en route to Court 0.
This would increase capacity but the atmosphere and dynamics of this glorious event would change. Once the first few rounds have taken place I predict it will be a ghost town. Thousands of people do not turn up just to watch juniors and veterans.
Progress. You can't stop change. However. for the reasons stated, I don't feel that they are being entirely honest about their ultimate intentions.
Ken | 29.09.24 - 9:11 a.m. | #
|
|
just as long as it's not another Wembley.
Peter T | 29.09.24 - 10:45 a.m. | #
|
|
This is very much a local issue for me. The park will be decimated by this development, not just from the increased noise and loss of a beautiful view but also because the supposed benefits will not eventuate. We all know there's a huge gulf between the ideals of a CGI graphic and the actual reality. Southfields and Wimbledon cannot cope with all the additional traffic and crowding this will create. I played golf there with my son a few years ago, just after the club members - nearly all white, permed women in their seventies - were given the 85K bung. It's a beautiful sweep of land with hundreds of mature trees - perfect for an extension of the existing park. But with the lobbying, bribery and corruption that is going on behind the scenes, what chance do trees and grass have?
daveid76 | 29.09.24 - 12:01 p.m. | #
|
[takes out lime-green crayon]
Since Tramlink will eventually have to relocate platforms at Wimbledon due to Crossrail 2, could you extend the tram at street level to Wimbledon Park to provide extra capacity?
TW | 29.09.24 - 12:12 p.m. | #
|
|
Thank you for your "on the one hand, on the other hand" appraisal of all the issues around this development. The London Wildlife Trust supported the application. I've only ever been to the Tennis Tournament once. I've been to Wimbledon Park a few times as a relative local. It always feels a bit cramped. The local Tories (in Wandsworth)are already using the approval to attack the Mayor which makes me think it is the right decision.
south london lad | 29.09.24 - 12:15 p.m. | #
|
Is it a necessary expansion though? I thought the main problem was with local congestion, which expansion won't help!
£85k EACH!!!!! Forget tennis, I think I'll take up golf!
Cornish Cockney | 29.09.24 - 12:53 p.m. | #
|
I was thinking of visiting Wimbledon Park a while ago, guess I should visit before I'm greeted with construction materials.
On one hand, the money generated from the courts could be great, and an expanded park isn't a bad thing. Yet that comes at the cost of the local nature, and is it really such a problem to have qualifying matches in Roehampton? I'd rather they just open up the golf course to everyone so the park can be even larger.
TW - I'd love an extended tram, but I reckon TfL would tell everyone to use the District line instead.
All Over 2a | Homepage | 29.09.24 - 2:58 p.m. | #
|
I think you have summed up perfectly the absolutely spurious arguements for and against. I walked through Wimbledon Park as part of the Capital Ring friday last and was amazed at what all the fuss is about. The only two things that struck me were that it has its own police station and that the facilities were better than the average South London park no doubt owing to the population of the surrounding neighbourhoods living well above the average national income. As for the nature argument, there is hardly any original nature in London. Its all been changed in some way by man (including Capability Brown) so this is just a bit more change. As long as it is done well why not?
For me this is just substituting one elitist sport venue for another. If the councils can get some sort of planning gain from the developers so much the better, although Merton seems to be getting far more than Wandsworth. Some affordable housing somewhere might have been nice.
keith the Kraut | 29.09.24 - 3:30 p.m. | #
|
A similar argument has been taking place in Enfield where a council golf course has closed, and Spurs want to take over the site, turning half into a training ground for their women's team, and half into a public park.
Is this a loss of "public" space or a gain?
Mikey C | 29.09.24 - 11:36 p.m. | #
|
Living close by and frequently enjoing the view across the lake I have been in two minds about this project since it was first suggested.
Fundamentally there will be a lot of disruption to make it happen and that will probably be the worst part of it. However, real life is never as good as the CGI so I have always been anti given it's lack of year round useability.
I'm also confused by Roehampton as a lot of money was spent on creating the National Tennis Centre which only opened in 2007. Yet it's already deemed not good enough. What will happen when the All England Club decides they want to expand still further?
ap | 30.09.24 - 9:33 a.m. | #
|
|
"tennis industrial complex". lol
Nick | 30.09.24 - 12:51 p.m. | #
|
|
Thumbs up for "racketeers".
Kabson | 02.10.24 - 10:07 a.m. | #
|
|
|
TridentScan v2.10.0 | Privacy Policy
|