NOT another egg at Potters Bar (next to Tower Bridge) please

Join in these discussions today! Log in or register.
Friday 14 June 2002 12.13pm
What are your views on the proposed redevelopment of Potters Bar, by Tower Bridge? There is a consultation document - see Southwark Council site - - under Potters Bar - inviting comments - Huurumph. As there is little or no proper open green space in that area, wouldn't it be great to have an old fashioned sort of park - think Soho Sq and Embankment Gardens and NOT yet more polished granite and water features aka Waterloo - all I'm asking for is somewhere to sit on a summer's day or night with the sky overhead, real trees and the scent of jasmine..... no more phormiums no more sculptural plants - I want plants that look and smell like they belong in a garden in this country..... so if you work here - what abt a place for a fag and sarnie at lunch time - and if you live here or if you are around in the evenings - sit on the bench by the raised beds to the side of Tower Bridge lit up when it's quieter, it can be one of the most beautiful places in London - all it needs is a little less concrete paving.

'm not so into parks and green spaces - but given the quality of the buildings so far along the river front (apologies to residents but have you seen the river bank from the river), I'm increasingly of the view that a plain simple grass park with proper trees would be fab. It is a wonderful site that runs straight down to the riverside - if any of you have sat on the bench in the quiet of the late evenings with Tower Bridge lit up, you will know what I mean. Do we really need more restaurants, shops and entertainment (given the proximity of Butlers W, HAys G etc). It will be the ONLY green space that runs to the river - and by green space I mean an ole fashioned type of place with GRASS, TREES (). Just somewhere to sit under the (grey) sky.
Friday 14 June 2002 12.20pm
First, I think you mean Potter's Field, not Potters Bar!!!

Secondly, I haven't read the document yet, but I get the impression that it only covers the car/coach path, the balloon site and the college buildings, not the existing green space.
Friday 14 June 2002 12.26pm
If you write to Southwark they will send you a copy of the document and yes, it does only cover the coach park and balloon site and I think would improve the area. The actual 'field' won't be lost.
Saturday 15 June 2002 9.02am
Having haunted the rivera's edge since a small child, I think a bit more grass, not less would be wonderful.

Ideally I would like a 'natural' river side green space, with the appropiate flora and fauna! but I doubt if that would materialise in a thousand years again...

Definitely less granite and concrete, more grass and wooden benches, a plot more 'user' friendly!

James was the old car park the area for paupers burials? could they still build on it?
Sunday 16 June 2002 11.02am
Sorry to disagree, but the greenfield site inbetween the egg and the site is adequate already, in my opinion- RATHER, they could do with better landscaping and maintaining the existing greenfield, rather than blocking this effectively brownfield development, which, from a cursory look, seems like quite a good idea to me- certainly an improvement on what is there already, which is frankly a dump.
Sunday 16 June 2002 11.09pm
It's good to disagree MM, how boring it would be on this site to have everyone agreeing with each other!
To be honest though I could never really understand exactly what was brownfield development , sorry what I mean is can you remind me what a 'brownfield' is, thankks...;-)
Monday 17 June 2002 10.12am
Brownfield refers to a site that has been used for something else in the past, as opposed to greenfield, which is virgin land, i.e. land that has never been built on.
Wednesday 19 June 2002 12.43pm
yes but the point is a "proper" park with grass, trees and planting - not another token gravel and water feature type of place. The bit by GLA building is a bit of an apology for a green space taking into account the numbers of people working and living around there - and this is before the more London Bridge development comes into full swing. Once the Potters field site is dev - there is no going back - nothing in a 20 minute walk - not this side or across the river - the closest that I know of is a trudge to Southwark Park. But I suppose financial considerations will win out in the end
Wednesday 19 June 2002 1.40pm
The actual grassy bit of Potters Field isn't going to be lost in the regeneration, it's the coach park area that's going to be built on. If you cross Tooley Street and walk up Fair Street you will find St John's Churchyard - a secluded park, which once it has been spruced up in the next year will be a much better alternative to the overcrowded Potter's Field brown grass.
Thursday 20 June 2002 10.06pm
i.e. it is a brownfield site that is being redeveloped, hence a good thing, insofar that there will be no net loss of greenfield. Before creating new greenfield, Southwark council should prioritise the improvement of its existing greenfield sites, which are a mess. Cf: Burgess Park, for example.

To post a message, please log in or register..

Keep up with SE1 news

We have three email newsletters for you to choose from: