Forum Topic

No live music events in Gunnersbury this summer

So Lenny Kravitz is not coming to Gunnersbury Park any more after the Waterworks Festival pulled out. I wouldn't be surprised if the Soho House Festival gets moved elsewhere or cancelled.I can hear events taking place in Gunnersbury and sometimes the noise is annoying and I'm sure, if you live close, these concerts are a pain. However, people need to think back to what Gunnersbury Park was like before it attracted new investment. As I understand it, much of the grant revenue received is dependent on the CIC generating revenue sources of its own so there is a potential double whammy.When the park was really on its uppers there was talk of giving over part of it for development or turning the buildings into a school - nobody wants to go back to that time but that may be where we are heading unless this year is just a blip.

Anita Blake ● 32d65 Comments

on a point of information CICs (Community Interest Companies)are not Charities. They aren't registered with the Charity Commission and aren't regulated by it. Not being Charities, CICs don't enjoy the benefits that Charities do. CICs are liable for corporation tax and can't claim gift aid on donations. Some large grant funders, Garfield Weston being one, will only fund charities, so being a CIC, Gunnersbury is excluded from some grant funding. Charities have to comply with Charity Commission requirements, which includes providing more detailed information which is made available on the Charity Commission's website.CICs are regulated by companies house and as Gunnersbury qualifies as a small company, turnover below 15 million, it can file accounts that provide less detail than a charity would have to provide. One total figure for each of turnover gross profit and admin expenses. That would be why it's hard to see how much is earned from events gross and the net profit from them.If the two Council's had required the Trust to be a Charity, it would have provided greater transparency around its finances. It would also enjoy the tax breaks a charity gets.

Kathleen Healy ● 6d

Would hope Gunnersbury is safe from any 'sculduggery', we hear of all sorts going on in other places, like them not using legal route to get what they want.  However the Gunnersbury team seem hard working and havemet with residents etc., and think they are doing a good job, do agree concerns of residents should be considered.

Janice Evans ● 6d

Good to be here. But took 18 emails to register an account. And then had to use my other email to reregister. So now have two accounts and waiting on an admin to fix it please. Might try deleting one myself if possible. I understand law but this forum is doing my head in. 

John E. ● 6d

It is sadly not a conspiracy, councillors like Shaheen, who told residents to take the councils to court if they don't like it, sit on the board of CIC/Charity trustees. If you watch the licence review you will see the licensing enforcement officer Maunders who is supposed to enforce the law, fine organisers even, mocking residents instead and dismissing the hundreds of complaints he gets. He was chatting for an hour prior to the event starting with the Live Nation chap instead of residents too. This was observed by many and is on video.As for Wimbledon, it's very different to Gunnersbury. It is false to compare the two. The Gunnersbury one is an actual very specific separate document not up for interpretation, as opposed to the deed covenant in Wimbledon. Gunnersbury clearly states use as a park and sports only. Wimbledon stipulates leisure as well, which can be interpreted. The Gunnersbury covenant also has  precedent, where it was used to stop development before in the 1980s. I remember when they shut down the stables in a closed meeting without resident participation and tried to build business blocks. It's when residents organised just like now to stop those who would like to profit from public spaces. The Friends of Gunnersbury Park wouldn't exist if not for that. They tried to vary the covenant with section 84 in tribunal and failed. Only workshops were allowed in the Arts Centre. The small mansion is now closed and none of the private for-profit events in the museum are allowed nor can be due to precedent. Now can you get a corrupt judge to change that? Maybe. But it would not benefit those of us living near the park. It would also set a nationwide precedent for all covenants to be ignored and dismissed in favour of renting or selling public land. They are there to protect that land/ buildings for the public from monopolies and land grabs. So I understand how you think those things, as there has been a lot of misinformation floating about over the years but they are thankfully incorrect.And no need for decline if they run the charity as a charity. Am sure if the CIC became transparent and worked with residents instead of fighting us all the time  things would improve. It baffles me why not use the Capel Manor students more for example?

John E. ● 6d

Welcome to the Forum John.

Janice Evans ● 6d

Francis, you have just said what I was about to say, you have put it much better than I would have though.

Janice Evans ● 6d

You make some good points. It is extraordinary that the CIC doesn't at least publish the amount of revenue gained per annum for these events so the issue can be put in perspective.I do have to take issue with the insinuation that councillors or the CIC are in someway driven by the needs of foreign corporations rather than the interests of the community. By veering towards conspiracy theory territory you are undermining your case.You also might be placing too much faith in covenants. Talk to people living near Wimbledon Park about how much protection they offer. Sainsbury's car park in Chiswick is Metropolitan Open Land protected by a covenant and that is going to be built on.I recall at least two proposals that would have seen the partial loss of Gunnersbury Park to public use. One was for a private school to take over the mansion building and the other was for housing along Lionel Road North. You have to assume that the proposers of these schemes believed that any covenant wouldn't block them.We probably have to see years of decline before we are back at this stage but the worry would be that we have embarked on this road.

Francis Rowe ● 6d

I had to join this forum as one of my neighbours insisted. I see some of the same names you see on Next Door. People who live in Bedford Park, Isleworth or have done work for Ealing Council. All of them use insults like nimbys and attack. All of them live far away not to be affected by cocaine use, car break ins, crowds, urinating and exposure. All support the rich promoters and dismiss regular people. All can easily go to the various purpose built event venues like the Shepherd's Bush Empire, Hammersmith Apollo,  Exhibition White City and now the Bee's Stadium instead. They have options. We don't. We live here and won't move home so that an American large corporation can make profits and the greedy councils can enrich themselves. Yes! Because why is this not done in any other park? How come there is money for those other parks? But here the secretive CIC can hire anyone as a contractor without a transparent tender process and can avoid publishing full accounts or any scrutiny. This public land was just rented to them without proper consultation. They operated at a loss last year. The question is why? They had more events than ever before. So something smells wrong here. I am sure the likes of Events Umbrella and Vanguardia who they hire have made a profit however.I don't really deal with the Residents Association in question- there were actually several associations that had formally complained and spoke at the licence review- but they were correct to show a better, less impactful solution to restoring the various buildings. I question the CIC CEOs nonsense at the Residents Meeting this week- that he failed to advertise- about needing 35,000 per grant to apply as just a desire to continue using a public park as an event arena. They have a charity but it is such in name only. At the end of the day many of us attempted talking to them and reaching a compromise. The CIC and councils just doubled down. Perhaps a covenant legal challenge is in our future, where the councils will use our taxes to defend the rich foreign corporations wasting it on solicitors. Hopefully they see sense and listen to those of us who have had enough of being ignored and attacked by those who are supposed to protect us. But let's be realistic, they won't. So far they have doubled down and said they won't make any meaningful changes. I think this will continue until some of the councils’ leadership is held personally responsible and there are legal consequences.PS. Just to address some false claims on here:No, the park can't be sold for development. There is a covenant protecting it so spreading false information is not helpful. In fact the councils tried this several times in its history and failed because of the covenant. Also why Friends of Gunnersbury Park was created as the Georgian Society.As for it being run down, it being fixed has nothing to do with the CIC or events. The Bees built the sports center and maintain it and the sports fields. The museum and orangery were restored with money from the National Lottery, only to sit mostly empty and be used for private events and run down again. The cafe was rebuilt with insurance and council money.The CIC gives back 300,000 to Ealing council from the 500,000 they receive from both councils to cut grass, maintain trees and bins. So it's our taxes paying for most of the maintenance. Removing graffiti and other odd jobs are done by the Community Payback Scheme by the Ministry of Justice, so offenders working for free. If anything the events just pay for more events and more profits for the organisers.As for the young people argument, there are plenty of purpose built venues as listed above and many many many other festivals that are better managed and do not cause so much crime and disruption. But also let's discuss how young people need to pay often double and even quadruple for an event compared to just 5 years ago. Not just inflated ticket prices, everything inside is also extremely expensive. Events are oversold and it's one big mosh pit. The reason behind this is corporations profits as the likes of Festival Republic owned by Americans Live Nation -who also own Ticket Master- slowly but surely become a monopoly. Meanwhile our councils pay for policing, planning and cleanup subsidising their profits from our taxes. Purpose built venues struggle to survive while competing with councils and culture is damaged. They will pay for PR and so called experts to justify this at any cost. Protected wildlife species? Who cares? Damaged trees? Again no one cares. Crime and drugs? No, corporate profits are more important. Someone is profiting from all of this but it isn't young people or taxpayers.

John England ● 6d

I've read the report submitted by the residents' association on funding for Gunnersbury Park. A lot of work has gone into it and some good points are made and people who take the time and effort to produce something that they believe will contribute to the betterment of their area deserve credit.There are, however a couple of fundamental flaws in the analysis. Firstly, while I don't know how effective the management of the park at winning bids for grant funding, this source has already brought in millions and largely pays for the park. It seems highly unlikely that tens of millions of funding has been left on the table, particularly in this financially challenging time.Secondly, current thinking in grant giving bodies appears to be that the recipient must first demonstrate their own ability to fund themselves sustainably. Money is not given out to bail organisations out that may be in trouble but to those which demonstrate the acumen to prove that they will not be dependent on further hand outs to support basic operations.The loss of commercial revenue is a double whammy because it will also reduce future grant revenue.The report seems to me an exercise in wishful thinking and perhaps a recognition that damage has been done by the cancellation of this summer's events.

Francis Rowe ● 14d

“ everything they do against the elderly affects their families andmakes life harder for them, they were having to pay their parents heating bills,”Yes that’s precisely Labour’s plan. Leave it to the younger hardworking high tax paying workforce to pay for their aging parents because this government is only there to protect people on benefits. They won’t even pay the WASPI’s what is due to them.

Steve Taylor ● 18d

Thing is all the working people and those on benefits have ageing parents, so everything they do against the elderly affects their families andmakes life harder for them, they were having to pay their parents heating bills, no wonder they are fed up with them all.

Janice Evans ● 18d

I totally agree with you, Beryl. And you are right. This Labour government, and in particular Starmer and Reeves, don’t care a jot about elderly people and the huge contributions they have made to society. They have made it 100% clear that they will only help working people and people on Benefits.

Steve Taylor ● 18d

"No idea what a Nimby is."It means "Not In My Backyard".

Richard Greenhough ● 18d

Beryl, you probably loved the park as it used to be as I did, but in order to keep it funding had to be increased.

Janice Evans ● 18d

I don't like correcting but you had a bit of a typo there, the name is Rothschild.

Janice Evans ● 18d

Thank you for the info Stephen. No idea what a Nimby is. Any way we nonagenarians shruch criticism off like water off a duck's back. We were usuing the park when he was still in diapers. The park given to the area by Lord Gothschild. Stated for public use only. . The Queen planted a tree there in is memory shortly after his death. Tim , like our present PM cares not a jot about the elderly and infirm who suffered for 98 days last year . Not able to use the ateas of the park suitable for zimmer frames and walking canes. Elderly dogs unable to cope with having to walk a round about way to get to the wooded area. Then of course the huge quantity of grass burned forever so RHS told CIC  by the acids and stuff from machinery .

Beryl Bashford ● 19d

I thought 80s music was rubbish at the time, but with the benefit of hindsight I think I formed that opinion because it was being played a lot ( obviously, it was the 80s) and so you heard the dross as well as the good stuff.Some artists who made it big in the 80's ( and yes, I know some of them had already released stuff in the 70's)Madonna, Duran Duran, The Smiths, Kate Bush, Stone Roses, REM, Talk Talk, The Police, Tears for Fears, U2.And gigs were still louder in the 80s than they are now, I remember leaving plenty of concerts where it took a couple of hours for my hearing to go back to normal.

Andrew Jones ● 20d

I think you’ll find that Tim Garfoot was mocking you, calling you a hypocrite and accusing you of being a NIMBY

Steve Taylor ● 20d

Why would their tunes change David. Tim and myself are of the same opinion about these events .  Especially on 'Karma will out'

Beryl Bashford ● 21d

But what about the permanent destruction of grass areas. Elderly people not able to walk around all the rubble and areas closed off making them having to do a detour. Not easy with sticks or zimmers. AND FOR 98 DAYS OF THE YEAR. What about all the rubbish piling up by the main gates days on end. And the anti social behaviour after closing time  . How we residents suffered.

Beryl Bashford ● 21d

Well said . Sure is  Karma.

Beryl Bashford ● 21d

If you want it loud, head over to the Troxy in July for sunn O)))

Steve Townsend ● 23d

“ were enjoying the burgeoning  musical genres of the 60's and 70's/80's in their youth - loud music, listening to stuff and doing things that their parents hadnt and didnt approve of”Sorry I disagree. 80’s music was rubbish. Armani suits and Gucci shoes on stage playing mindless electronic music. Current stuff isn’t even music. Bring back the 70’s when there was were no silly health and safety noise levels at Hammersmith Odeon” - Viz AC/DC.

Steve Taylor ● 23d

Beryl, I've no doubt that if Tim et al walked one meter in your shoes, their tunes would change.

David Lesniak ● 23d

Well said. Some people have written we should move out of London !  Not only the noise and anti behaviour many of us are talking about . The permanent destruction of so much of the grassland by all the acids and oils is soul destroying . Also elderly folk with canes and zimmers have to go all the way round the mulberry bush  to get to where they want to be /go. These folk supporting all these events don't seem to give a toss about that. Why should the elderly peole move out of London due to the curse of all these events?  Why should areas of this once lovely park be destroyed by them .

Beryl Bashford ● 24d

Why should we move out of our family homes due to noise and anti social behavioiur  from these events. ?

Beryl Bashford ● 24d

Don't like the thought of losing it after all the work and effort gone into saving it, which is what we all wanted, there have been grants etc., to bring it back to life, and we knew it would have to be mostly self supporting, andwhoever was involved has done really well,  Perhaps a bit more consideration on the anti-social behaviour and noise levels would haveavoided complaints.

Janice Evans ● 25d

It is perhaps worth reminding people that the park is huge - walking around its perimeter is a 5km journey. I have visited numerous times when set up or dismantling is taken place for an event and been able to enjoy the park. The days during which it completely unusable are limited.The CIC may have mishandled communications and the way it dealt with its neighbours but at the same time there are a group of people living near the park would veto every large scale event planned so I don't think anything could have been done to placate them. Without funding from these events, the park will revert how it was over a decade ago - scruffy, neglected and down at heal with a cash strapped council eyeing bits of it for development.

Francis Rowe ● 25d

Multiple missed opportunities to close the gap on what the council was licencing and the NIMY's demanding- epic. fail from the council in not getting ahead of this. Waterworks has relocated to The Cause in Canning Town for a 36-hour continuous party -they wont be back nor will any other significant eventsThe NIMBYism here reeks- whether  youve been in the area for 1,  10 or 30 + years, you have the comforts and exclusive access to a beautiful park around the corner for 300 odd days a year. It's not " your " park though, is it !? Its an amenity that should be accessible for the whole community (and ...gosh, also from outside the community) . The existing licencing was easily strong enough - music-off at 10.30 AIRI imagine most of these NIMBY's were enjoying the burgeoning  musical genres of the 60's and 70's/80's in their youth - loud music, listening to stuff and doing things that their parents hadnt and didnt approve of ...hypocrites the lot of 'em

Tim Garfoot ● 25d

Yearsago we had many quiet events enjoyed by regulars. locals and visitors. The Mansions were rented out by the Police and other public services for their meetings. Art classes and Art Exhibitions in the the big Mansion. Outdoor Theatre , Music concerts in the Mansion Houses, and of course a visit from the Queen and Prince Philip on her Golden Jubilee. She lunched upstairs in the Small Mansion House, The Orangery was a venue for weddings and parties . Splendid sight to see the Bridal Horse and Carriage arrive. Outside the Museum we had craft fairs and food festivals.  No drug dealers  and junkies and winos vomitting and defacating in the park or residents gardens . No roads needed to be closed . No policing needed . No areas in the park closed off to the public , no piles of rubbish left outside the gates for days on end. The revenue from from all these events kept  the park in good order. No noise to disturb local residents either.

Beryl Bashford ● 26d

Well said Maria - absolutely spot on in what you say. My experience too. It is sad that people who don’t agree with an alternative view then immediately turn to abuse.

Tim Clayton ● 27d

It is upsetting to hear people ask why residents make a fuss over 'just a few days' of festivals. Here are the true numbers: what the CIC originally wanted for this year was 28 festival days. With the attendant set up and dismantle days, (lorries driving across the park, loud sound checks, swathes of the park fenced off) the total would be 118 days. Just short of 4 months, mostly during the better weather (when people would like to be able to open their windows) and the school holidays (when children use the park most).I lived in Lionel Road North for 33 years and attended innumerable productive meetings with councillors and officials on matters relating to the park. Since the CIC took over, however, residents' legitimate concerns have been brushed aside, residents arrogantly ignored and at the debriefs after each festival, simply fobbed off with promises that 'we will do better' which never materialise.

Maria Isabel Cunha ● 27d

Personally I wouldn't want to live near it being as I suffer with migraine,but do worry what you could end up with if not enough funds raised.

Janice Evans ● 27d

Thanks for being called loud mouthed when you have not even met me. That really is balanced.  The only thing loud is the festivals who don’t measure noise properly. The residents organisations are the balanced ones who get ignored - I have experienced it. It is not me who is being arrogant. Anyway they are gone - hopefully for good.

Tim Clayton ● 27d

There is another possibility ... As background, there seems to be a misunderstanding of the roles of licensing and planning. The processes are wholly independent of each other. As I understand it: **  On licensing: The residents' licence review application was submitted many months before it was considered at a panel hearing. Residents are not responsible for the delay between the two or the timing of the hearing which was set by the council. Regardless, the CIC has a licence for events and there is no licensing reason to stop them from happening this year, though with some stricter terms to comply with.  **  On planning: The Gunnersbury Park CIC employs consultants to make/support its planning (and licensing) applications and together they were responsible for the timing of their own application for a 10-year blanket planning permission for events. Was the consultant unaware that there were strong opinions locally on what happens in the park and around it before, during and after festivals or did they and the CIC assume that there would be no objections? Or did they assume that, even if there were objections, no matter whether few or many, that LBH would waive through the application? Or were they unaware that councils should avoid contentious issues in the run-up to local elections and that that fact could affect timing including the date for it to be considered by the planning committee? If they didn't consider that there could be a high number of objections, what does that say about the CIC's listening abilities since 2018 when the first festival generated so many complaints, and since including very publicly at two Chiswick Area Forums including one last year? Equally significantly, can it be that planning consultants and the CIC had forgotten that there would be back and forth discussions between planning officers and the applicant as they consider the objections - and that they can tale time?  These failings have nothing to do with residents. Blaming residents for delays for which they aren't responsible isn't fair. Failing to apply in good time for planning permission for this year's festival programme has nothing to do with residents. The CIC has eight years of experience of making licensing and planning applications - and employs consultants for advice. The CEO has said, in public and several times, that it costs the CIC £25,000 for each planning application. The CIC should question whether the fee (assumed to be £25,000) spent on the 10-year planning application - including on timing the application so it could be resolved before this year's festivals - was money well spent.

Joanna Biddolph ● 28d

"The more likely scenario to me seems like the objectors cleverly timed the review to cause maximum impact"Looked at another way, Francis, the council didn't factor in the basic mechanisms of the process. I'd call that inept.

David Lesniak ● 28d

David, as I understand it the planning applications for these events were submitted at the end of last year and due to be consider in January or February. However, there was then a formal request for a review of the licence which was granted. This required both parties to submit detailed evidence and for it to be reviewed and a decision to be made. This wasn't completed until last month by which time there was no opportunity to convene a Licensing Panel before the election. You may be right and this process took longer than it should due to bureaucratic inertia, I simply don't know. However, it seems to me unlikely. The council would have known it could end up on the hook for bailing out the CIC so would have been desperate to do all they could to get these permissions through on time. The more likely scenario to me seems like the objectors cleverly timed the review to cause maximum impact.

Francis Rowe ● 28d

I don't think anyone appreciates that by 2028, there will be no more council funding.  The current declining funds I heard are coming to an end which means if Gunnersbury Park isn't self-financing by then .... I suppose we'll be back to the days when CIP managed our parks!

John Roberts ● 29d

Yes, that seems to be what happens, let's hope they compromise.

Janice Evans ● 29d

So the moral of the story if neighbours to Gunnersbury Park don't support music festivals what may follow could be far worse!

Jayne Thorburn ● 29d

Where my sister lived, some neighbour's complained about a children's home being close by, they closed it down and turn it into drug rehabilitation centre, were the neighbour's happy.....They were fuming,

Janice Evans ● 29d

Hi Francis-Is it not the council that issues permits? Is it another entity holding up the permit process? Is the permit issue not the reason for cancellation? To your point about festivals being baked in, then why are they getting cancelled? Shooting themselves in the foot. Yes, it is the council's fault for the systemic collapse. They knew what was needed. They knew when it was needed. They did not expedite. They have a history of this sort of thing. People urinating and defecating and shooting up or whatever in your front garden is not a few days of annoyance. Using that logic, if the same happened next to a pub, there would be more recourse. It's not rocket science what happens nor how to ameliorate it. Were extra wardens part of the license agreement? How many? Who pays? What's the process for immediate adjustment should the need arise? Where is the clause holding Lime Bike et al accountable for extra staff from their side to tend to all the bikes just dumped on people's property? And those blocking public access and egress? You know, in case of emergency at a festival with 1000s more people nearby. But hey ho, let's give the council a free pass.

David Lesniak ● 29d

That’s always the way, loud mouth extreme views drown out the majority of people who are decent and happy to compromise and take a balanced view. This is happening more & more in this country.

Jayne Thorburn ● 29d

Judging by this thread and talking to neighbours and friends in the area, the consensus view on these events is that they are a bit annoying when they are on but recognition that the vast improvement of the park has been enabled by them plus some pleasure in interesting high profile events taking place on our doorstep. If there is anyone being selfish and arrogant here it is the self appointed resident groups who have refused to compromise and left us in a position that nobody but those with the most extreme opinions on this wanted.

Andrew OSullivan ● 29d

These councils and the CIC deserve each other. 3 selfish arrogant organisations with no regard for local people and the environment and their views and feelings. If these music events are falling apart then good. There’s a phrase for it- karma.

Tim Clayton ● 29d

Anyone who has lived in the same house in London for 40 plus years will have seen massive change. Agree put more security on any locals complaining move its fantastic to have a local venue that puts on some great events.

Jayne Thorburn ● 30d

Once again the miserabilist don't change anything win out. If there is anti social behaviour you put more stewards on, you dont cancel it. Maybe everyone should move out of London, way less anti social behaviour then

Tony Mansell ● 30d

Or even social housing development and lose the space all together. We live in a different part of chiswick and still have people urinating in the front garden through the fence! it’s London, not right I agree. Given the few nights a year it’s a small price to pay to make it work via CIC. Councils have zero money for essentials so the park will go is that what the neighbours want to happen? Social housing on their doorstep and no park……congratulations on reaching 80 think about future generations & local hospitality that desperately needs supporting.

Jayne Thorburn ● 31d

Hi David, I'm not averse to the odd bit of council bashing when it is deserved but I really don't think it applies in this case particularly as the council don't actually manage  the park.There are lots of events taking place in the park including outdoor cinema but the big festivals are the ones that bring in the serious amount of money.When the park was jointly run by Hounslow and Ealing it was a drain on council finances. The transfer to a CIC took it off the books and led to a period of sustained improvement with the new entity being very successful in bringing grant funding. Grant giving bodies these days are reluctant to dispense money to organisations that aren't doing their own revenue generation.Therefore festivals are baked in to the proposition for Gunnersbury and I don't think anyone makes a secret of that. Is it the council's fault that this system has collapsed, hopefully on a temporary basis? I don't see how. The only way they could have stopped it happening was by refusing to do the review but can you imagine the storm that would have created?People who say I would think differently if the park was on my door step and I had people doing unspeakable things in my front garden. I honestly don't think I would - the joy of having such a massive green space nearby would outweigh a few days of noise and annoyance each year.If what happens proves terminal for events at Gunnersbury and the CIC collapses, we all will have a grievance because the shortfall will be covered by local authorities meaning increased charges or reduced services.

Francis Rowe ● 31d

Maybe they should stage a giant silent disco.Obviously there will be a funding shortfall for the Park this year. One wonders if the well remunerated CIC bods will forgo some salary to ameliorate that.As for these events benefiting the local area, that’s a moot point. The ticket prices are an obvious bar to many who might otherwise attend a free or subsidised event.

Simon Hayes ● 31d

Think They have outdoor cinema end of July.

Janice Evans ● 31d

Do we have drive in cinemas in the U.K

Janice Evans ● 31d

Agree they could try quieter events that won't disturb neighbour's.

Janice Evans ● 31d

In addition to noise and traffic chaos, there is the anti-social behaviour. My neighbours two doors up, a couple in their 80s who have lived there for 50 years, have had to put new gates up at the front to stop drunken/drugged-up concert goers using their front garden as toilet.Ask yourself how much you would appreciate that if it was *your* front garden before telling residents to stop complaining!

Susan Kelly ● 31d

Sorry, Francis, this sounds like the council screwed itself and all of us. While no fan of the intrusion these events cause those, I can appreciate the need for revenue. There are also a number of other less offensive options out there: silent cinema, anyone? Opera? Dance? Something to draw a different demographic. Perhaps an art exhibit? Just. Think. Outside. The. Box. You're giving the council a free pass is precisely what is wrong with the current state of affairs. You've appear complacent to utter inefficiency and mediocrity when leadership and proactive measures are needed. If there were extenuating circumstances, get creative. Call an emergency meeting, do something, anything, to expedite. By doing nothing, as you say, the council has dug a hole that didn't need to be there. A hole they, themselves, told us all they needed to be rid of. Do the  math. If you shoot yourself in the foot, it hurts.

David Lesniak ● 31d

Times change and if we don't use it then we will lose it. It was very run down and not pleasant walking there, the transformation is obvious for all to see. This isn’t about people who have chosen to live there for 40 plus years but about the future generation. Think about it and stop complaining.

Jayne Thorburn ● 31d

It was lovely but run down, would you rather it was sold for development, we all said we wanted t keep it if I remember,.

Janice Evans ● 31d

I have lived near the Park for 40 years. Many of my neighbours have been here even longer. It was a quiet local amenity when we bought our houses and nobody consulted us about making it noisy and causing traffic chaos for several weeks every summer.

Susan Kelly ● 31d

The Lenny Kravitz gig is now at the Crystal Palace bowl. My friends and I had tickets and got an email but no explanation of why the venue changed.

Apple Leiper ● 32d

Nimby…..outrageous how in earth are we to protect our green spaces it costs money to maintain our parks so events are a natural contribution. Truly living close should be ashamed of themselves you live in London!

Jayne Thorburn ● 32d

I take that back...must go to Specsavers.

Keith Iddon ● 32d

The article says the organises were 'expilicitly' blaming the council,but then you know that already.

Keith Iddon ● 32d

The organisers didn't blame the council specifically rather pointed out that the event couldn't proceed without planning permission. That appears to have been delayed by a combination of the licence review initiated by residents' groups and the purdah period during the election. There is no way permission can be given until the next planning meeting which will be in June at the earliest. None of this is the council's fault and, as they may be now called on to bail out the CIC, they will have done all they could to avoid this happening. Whether the residents' groups deliberately timed the review to ensure the summer programme was wiped out, only they could tell you.

Francis Rowe ● 32d

The organisers are blaming the council for delaying the permission to proceed process according to the homepage.Another example of 'you snooze,you lose'.I wonder if the event will bother to try for Gunnersbury Park next year or just go for another venue without bothering.

Keith Iddon ● 32d

Some extra restrictions were clearly needed but this has now gone too far. The Soho House event still appears to be on. It's beyond my means and I'm not a member but it will be good to have at least one event taking place over the summer and it has a very strong line up.Surprised at the radio silence from the CIC on what is happening. They don't seem to handle communications very well which may be partly how they got into this mess.

Felicity Caborn ● 32d