SE23 Forum

Why are some people unable to go to an event without alcohol.

What a strange question. The answer to which can only be that they are alcoholics.

But the point is that the Horniman is not going to make alcohol compulsory for all events or visitors to the park, the question is should alcohol ever be allowed to be served/sold in the park, and if so under what restrictions.

Many other museums in London are able to sell alcohol in their restaurants, there is no reason why Horniman should not be the same.

Personally I have enjoyed many happy weekend afternoons in the park with a bottle or two of wine. I find it particularly enjoyable to soak up the sun, listen to the music drifting across the park, chat to friends, and have a glass or two of wine with some strawberries. I'm sure you'll agree that it sounds like a lovely summer afternoon.

I'm not unable to visit the park without alcohol, but occasionally I like to, and I don't see why you want to stop me.

Michael
Your activities sound very civilised as one would expect from you and you bring your own wine along. I am sure you and your friends conduct themselves in a civilised way , as you say listening to Elgar or Wagner in the distance.
You and others seem to be doing this very well without the need for a license.
I am trying to think of the residents who live close to the lovely park

Nobody is trying to stop you from having a drink at lunchtime on a sunny afternoon with your friends Michael. The issue is an event that caters for up to 15,000 late at night where alcohol is consumed. How many tiolets does the Horniman have? Will they have porto loos? Will local people experience the joy of guests peeing in their front gardens on the way home? loud noise and rowdy behaviour? Also on any day of the week, after 2300!! This is the concern.

How much defecation in private gardens occurred during the 2009 Jerk Chicken event?

But we know that Horniman do not want to have 15,000 people in the park at 11pm. I think you know you are exaggerating the threat to local residents, despite there being some reasonable concerns.

My understanding is that the licensing committee will make a decision this evening. I hope somebody who attends will let us know the outcome, and whether there is any chance of events bigger than a plant sale taking place this year.

As has been said before, there is no evidence of how they are going to guarantee that the numbers can be controlled. yes, this is this worse case senario, but perfectly possible under the terms of the licence, if granted

The Horniman has stated that the Chicken event was a mistake and won't be repeated. Whilst obviously deeply traumatic for many of you, it was a one-off. They have stated that they don't want that sort of event again, and explained quite reasonably, I think, why they need a new licence. Why can they not be given the benefit of the doubt?

By being so strongly anti the licence change the local residents are taking the short view, without looking at the long view of the future of the museum and the benefit to the area as a whole.

Isnt that what fundraising, grants etc are all about? How much extra money does opening the park to 10,000+ people bring in, rather than a licence for just under 10,000 people? What sort of events are they planning? Do we need to create a 'PottersVille' in order to maintain a park and museum of local and historical interest? They have just spent a small fortune on building an educational centre and other improvements in the park. Nice to have but not really 'essential' in times of austerity. I'm all for maintenence, painting and repair, don't get me wrong, but grand designs need funding. Should this be paid for by all night parties? Local people have a right to be concerned and question how much more the licence extension is likely to bring in and how?

As some would say, the reference to the all night parties is IMHO inappropriate.

Twice in one day you are exaggerating the threat to local residents. Why?

Do you know how the numbers are going to be controlled? What plans are in place to stop a repeat of the last fiasco? It's a reasonable question IMHO.

gingernuts - don't ask us, ask the Horniman. Then by all means come back and tell us what they say. Perhaps issues of crowd control are addressed in the planning application. I haven't read it. Have you?

I think people are focussing too much on why there are any concerns at all rather on getting the basic questions answered. I have no wish to put the Horniman out of business or to see it suffer, however all that us being asked is that they demonstrate how they propose to manage numbers and pedestrian flow as well as the usual facilities such as loos and parking. This is a standard requirement yet the Horniman seemingly refuse to engage on this. They might say the cookout fiasco won't happen again but don't convince us that they can exercise the necessary admin and control needed in order to do so. All they have to do is present the required method statement. I don't actually think they have the organisational capacity to manage large events and why should they as its not their core business.

I remember when they were going round presenting their plans for the expansion and someone mentioned that they would be using the new space for a 'green room' for large events. It was pretty clear that there were planning larger scale events even then. It would have been an idea if they had arranged a public meeting to consult and present before they proceeded with the licence proposals and worked to instil more confidence in the community.

I'm just responding to Michael's comment that if the Horniman say they can manage the numbers 'that's good enough for him'. Wouldnt most people like to understand what controls are planned before being that confident?

Lewisham Health & Safety will conduct a risk assessment before permission is granted.

Gingernuts has obviously suffered from events before including the infamous poultry event.
I would assume they are very close to the park and as such deserve consideration.
When Mr Horniman donated his house and land in 19th century did he expect it to be used for tens of thousand of people chasing chickens , some who had been drinking to much.
Surely the Museum and Gardens ( note gardens not park ) were meant for quiet meditation.

But hey what do I know,

I know that they can get people out by 11pm, even if there are 20,000 of them. There is no suggestion of 'all night parties' in the licensing application, contrary to what you are trying to imply.

In relation to numbers, there are fairly good methods for estimating number of people are large unticketed events. That is how we know approximately how many people were at Jerk Chicken or how many go to Blackheath fireworks each year. It is also fairly easy to close gates when numbers approach 9,000. But it might be wiser to allow a couple of thousand extra in, rather than locking them out of the park to protect a license without protecting local streets.

Horniman have said they plan to run a few events of more than 5,000 people each year, much as they have done for many, many years. One of two of these might approach 10,000 but they have learnt from Jerk Chicken and know what went wrong with an event that they acknowledge outgrew Horniman.

It comes down to whether you believe the Horniman management are responsible and can manage events in the museum and gardens, or whether you think they are planning to run 'all night parties' every day of the year!

Thanks Michael, you make some good points. however I still dont understand why they need a licence for 15,000 given their desire to keep the numbers between 5000 and no more than 10,000? The arguement that the numbers may on occasion breach this top figure sounds weak to me and if they are able to control numbers shouldnt be an issue.

Michael
I appreciate your comments but surely Gingernuts as , I assume , a neighbour to the gardens is entitled to his views as well. His garden may very well back onto the Gardens as he is trying to read a book in his garden when there are many thousands over the fence chasing chicken , some worse for drink.
I wonder how good old Mr Horniman would think , after all he donated the house and land for the museum and gardens ( the word is gardens not park ).
Not sure he would expect such occasions as the infamous poultry evening.
Would not Dulwich Park be more suitable for such events and leave Horniman's for more sedate occasions.

But what do I know.

Gingernuts,
Thanks for acknowledging that I might have some good points. I assume that means you accept they are not planning to organise all night parties.

I tend to agree that if they are intending no more than 10,000 then they should not need a licence for 15,000. But that is exactly why I have considered the example of a situation where more people are arriving and letting them in is better than shutting them out. This means that if they are aiming for 10,000 people, they might knowingly breach a 10,000 licence for the benefit of the neighbours rather than as a deliberate policy.

It actually takes quite a lot to attract more than 10,000 people to Forest Hill. Apparently in advance of Jerk chicken there was regular radio advertising across South London. That is something that Horniman has never done before, and I expect they would ever allow to happen again. It take a massive publicity machine to attract significantly more than 10,000, it is not something that just happens by accident.