SE23.com - The Official Forum for Forest Hill & Honor Oak, London SE23
Online since 2002  -  10,000+ members

Home | SE23 Topics | Local Businesses | Wider Topics | Offered/Wanted/Lost/Found | Site Feedback | Advertising | Contact
Geddes Hairdressing & Barbering Studio One Armstrong & Co Solicitors


Post Reply  Post Topic 
Pages (7): « First < Previous 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 Next > Last »
Council's Plans for Camberwell Cemetery Woodland
Author Message
samuelsen


Posts: 210
Joined: Feb 2016
Post: #21
16-02-2016 10:32 PM

There is a superb summary of the issue at http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/...?5,1637832

Find all posts by this user Reply
lacb


Posts: 623
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #22
17-02-2016 11:00 AM

That is a post from someone who is squarely in favour of the council's controversial plans so not a balanced summary. I have also lost a loved one but that does not really change anything.

Burial, or rather the provision of it, is very political in a densely populated urban area - there can only ever be a finite area for this. If you do have loved ones buried on these sites then you should know that the council (Southwark) intend reusing these graves (older than 75 years) for new burials which they will sell London-wide.

Before doing that though they are removing trees including a section of woodland contiguous with the One Tree Hill nature reserve - this will scar the hillside. They are already removing mature trees from the Old Cemetery.

Note also that there is a large new space allocated for burial already on the old Nursery site. It beggars belief that yet more space should be desperately needed now but this is another example of how historic mismanagement continues to this day.

Find all posts by this user Reply
samuelsen


Posts: 210
Joined: Feb 2016
Post: #23
17-02-2016 12:38 PM

"That is a post from someone who is squarely in favour of the council's controversial plans so not a balanced summary. I have also lost a loved one but that does not really change anything."

I am sorry for your loss.

I have to disagree with you, it provides a balanced summary of how the situation has developed to date.

"Burial, or rather the provision of it, is very political in a densely populated urban area - there can only ever be a finite area for this. If you do have loved ones buried on these sites then you should know that the council (Southwark) intend reusing these graves (older than 75 years) for new burials which they will sell London-wide".

And a process is in place to contact those affected.

Before doing that though they are removing trees including a section of woodland contiguous with the One Tree Hill nature reserve - this will scar the hillside. They are already removing mature trees from the Old Cemetery.

The area being cleared in COC was an overgrown and neglected area by Southwark Council. It is not nor has it ever been a wood.

"Note also that there is a large new space allocated for burial already on the old Nursery site. It beggars belief that yet more space should be desperately needed now but this is another example of how historic mismanagement continues to this day."

Find all posts by this user Reply
lacb


Posts: 623
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #24
17-02-2016 01:00 PM

Quote:
The area being cleared in COC was an overgrown and neglected area by Southwark Council. It is not nor has it ever been a wood.


It is a neglected area which means that it has been allowed to return to nature. This is called scrub until such point that there are "significant trees" there (phrase is the one used by Council). This is what is known as woodland, by definition. There seems to be some confusion over this.

Find all posts by this user Reply
samuelsen


Posts: 210
Joined: Feb 2016
Post: #25
17-02-2016 01:19 PM

Have to vehemently disagree with you, I do not know how you can call it a wood, it is/was totally overgrown because of neglect by Southwark and Japanese Knot weed engulfing the area. There are signs up saying do not enter due to the knot weed so anyone doing so is giving the potential to spread this dangerous species.

This post was last modified: 17-02-2016 01:19 PM by samuelsen.

Find all posts by this user Reply
lacb


Posts: 623
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #26
18-02-2016 11:48 AM

You do not need to be vehement. I have explained to you how it is a wood and there is no need to enter it to know this. Have a look at the habitat survey which marks locations of knotweed and woodland:
http://www.southwark.gov.uk/download/dow..._july_2014

This post was last modified: 18-02-2016 11:49 AM by lacb.

Find all posts by this user Reply
samuelsen


Posts: 210
Joined: Feb 2016
Post: #27
18-02-2016 01:06 PM

No, it is not a wood, IT IS overgrown scrubland. end of.

Find all posts by this user Reply
lacb


Posts: 623
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #28
19-02-2016 11:33 AM

Ok, Mr/Mrs "End Of". Take that viewpoint up with the Council's Habitat surveyors!

Find all posts by this user Reply
152047


Posts: 130
Joined: Jan 2011
Post: #29
19-02-2016 06:11 PM

Err, I may have lost my mind but in the survey document prioduced by Southwark's surveyor the key to the plan splits the site into three categories:

1) established woodland;
2) dense scrub/immature woodland;
3) rough grassland/tall ruderal vegetation and scattered shrub.

The plans also show the location and extent of the knotweed. It doesn't quite look like armaggedon, I have seen more on the railway embankment at Forest Hill. In any event the usual cure is regular spraying with herbicide not cemetrification.

Find all posts by this user Reply
mrwandle


Posts: 73
Joined: Sep 2011
Post: #30
01-07-2016 09:54 AM

Poster up in Sainsbury's this morning advertising Southwark's consultation on an extension to Camberwell New Cemetery.

Proposal is to turn the disused, fenced off land into space for 1000 new graves. No mention of the recreation land or playground.

Open to 22 July 2016.

Find all posts by this user Reply
hillview


Posts: 119
Joined: Nov 2016
Post: #31
17-12-2016 02:06 PM

Update:

Quote:
It is now clear that funeral companies are in charge of Southwark burial policy.

Southwark Council announced last night it is going to ignore six months of consultation with residents, and take another three acres of Honor Oak Park for conventional, sterile burial plots - because of the demands of funeral companies.

http://www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk/fun...4593403146

Find all posts by this user Reply
samuelsen


Posts: 210
Joined: Feb 2016
Post: #32
17-12-2016 04:30 PM

The land was always intended for the use of burials and that is what is going to happen. We need local places to be able to burial our loved ones who have passed away. In Lewisham it means going to the other end of the borough in both Grove Park and Hither Green cemeteries. You are fortunate that burial space is available locally. The "modern" way of burial is to use lawned plots. Yes it results in graves being side by side, however it looks neat, tidy and saves costs for the borough in maintaining teh cemetery, i.e. cutting the lawned areas.

This post was last modified: 17-12-2016 04:34 PM by samuelsen.

Find all posts by this user Reply
wynell


Posts: 46
Joined: May 2013
Post: #33
17-12-2016 06:31 PM

It's about time people opted for cremation. It's seems crazy that we keep using land for burials when it is so limited. Either that or burial is for a limited time then then like the Chinese thd bones are put in a jar and would be more efficient to store/ display etc.
In the past I helped tend two cemeteries and whilst there were some visitors that regularly tended their loved ones the vast majority were left abandoned.

Given also the number of lonely old people who rarely see any relatives ask the proprietor of zn old age care home. Then why take up land space? Seems simple if the UK will have a population of 70 million where are we going to put them All?

Find all posts by this user Reply
wynell


Posts: 46
Joined: May 2013
Post: #34
17-12-2016 07:35 PM

Just to add latest figures show on average 1640 people die every day so doesn't take a genius to work out if all were burials just how much land will be required.

These figures are 2014 and with the growth of population this will increase so for those mathematicians out there how many graves per acre etc etc.

Somethings gotta Give!

Find all posts by this user Reply
Perryman


Posts: 809
Joined: Dec 2006
Post: #35
18-12-2016 04:11 PM

Its a nice thought that the spirits of our departed are floating around locally, rather than some foreign field.

But as a spirit, the last place I'd hang out is in an empty grave yard.
I'd be sitting next to my relatives, watching the TV.
Do what you want with my remains, buy sorry - you do not get rid of me that easily.

Find all posts by this user Reply
robin orton


Posts: 716
Joined: Feb 2009
Post: #36
18-12-2016 05:19 PM

Are you sure the management will allow your departed spirit to sit watching television with your relatives? They may have other plans for it.

So far as our bodies are concerned, I'm sure that when they are resurrected at the end of time the management will be able to trace all the necessary bits and reassemble them, wherever they have finished up. But it might avoid bureaucratic delays if they were left in one piece and tucked tidily away in a graveyard.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Perryman


Posts: 809
Joined: Dec 2006
Post: #37
19-12-2016 06:46 PM

Quote:
Are you sure the management will allow your departed spirit to sit watching television with your relatives? They may have other plans for it.


Isn't the idea of an afterlife meant to give comfort to the living?
Will I never be free from management and their devilish plans?

As far as our bodies are concerned, under normal circumstances, I don't think there is much left after 10 years in the grave. If the idea is to avoid decay for as long as possible, then you'll want to be buried in marshland, desert or in the permafrost layer... preferably irradiated, pickled and sealed in polythene.
I reckon the tar lakes under the old gasworks would also be an ideal site - totally sterile and no-one is going to go excavating around there for a long long time.

Find all posts by this user Reply
lacb


Posts: 623
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #38
20-12-2016 11:21 AM

Quote:
As far as our bodies are concerned, under normal circumstances, I don't think there is much left after 10 years in the grave.


Sorry, not true. The recommended period to allow for decomposition is 75 years IIRC. With the particular clay present at Camberwell Cemeteries, it is thought to be somewhat longer. One of a number of reasons which makes it not particularly suited for burial including poor drainage. However, the reason why the existing space is not being re-used more efficiently is due to poor historic management. Regardless of this, boroughs are not obliged to bury within their area - there are other options including burying out of borough and this has been a standard practice in London since at least Victorian times.

It is also not true that

Quote:
The land was always intended for the use of burials

, the particular area in question was a munitions factory, then a fireworks factory, then a nursery and then promised for community use. So I don't think it has had that intention for at least a century - probably never until now.

It is valuable local green space, adjacent to a busy road, that is most likely of great benefit to a pollution monitored area. It also adjoins the Forest Hill to New Cross railway embankment which is recognised as of borough wide significance for its ecological value. There are newts and hedgehogs present.

It might not be my choice but I recognise that a minority will always want burial for their loved ones. This is ok but it has to done sustainably - and that, surely, the boroughs are responsible for.

This post was last modified: 20-12-2016 11:23 AM by lacb.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Perryman


Posts: 809
Joined: Dec 2006
Post: #39
22-12-2016 01:33 AM

There are quite a few factors - temperature, moisture, coffin type, body size, age that affects the decomposition times, but even if the average is 100 years rather than 10, my error is pretty small compared to those who are counting on there being something substantial to work with when the trumpets call, unless by fluke they have been fossilised.

The same processes that strip the bodies of wild animals to nothing in a year on the surface will eventually do the same to us underground - this was the point I am trying to make.

Find all posts by this user Reply
wynell


Posts: 46
Joined: May 2013
Post: #40
22-12-2016 05:52 PM

Afterlife or not the question is where are we going to bury all the People? If as pointed out the reuse of a plot is around 100 years and as I previously stated the number of deceased is around 1500/day then burial has either got to be prohibitively expensive or like organ donation the conversation about cremation has to be brought to the fore.

One way or another just turning a small area of land over to burial is delaying the inevitable so in a years time when it is full where next?

Organ donation will provide the means of an Afterlife and the ashes left can fertilise plants/trees? Also given the ground conditions is there not a danger of bodies contaminating the water table?..I don't know just thought?

Find all posts by this user Reply
Pages (7): « First < Previous 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 Next > Last »

Friends of Blythe Hill Fields


Possibly Related Topics ...
Topic: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  HOP Recreation Ground to Become a Cemetery? PaperBagBadger 196 82,660 22-05-2015 02:18 PM
Last Post: lacb