Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I'd be interested in knowing this too - I really dislike the new railings as they provide no privacy for mourners at the graves - we now have passerbys and buses staring at us through the railing as we mourn.

At least with the old wooden fences it provide some privacy...it seems like whoever chose them thought more about aesthetics and making it "look" a certain way rather than the practical side of things!!!

  • 1 month later...
Agreed. Do you think the council could arrange for some planting/screening to go behind the railings to create some privacy for mourners- it seems very public now for what should be a very private affair. Any idea which department this would fall under?

(1) Two thirds of the run up Underhill is already 'protected' by a highish bank - it is a third (or less) of the actual graveyard which is now more readily visible from the road.


(2) That third was always visible to those walking along the road on the graveyard side, unless they were of restricted height, by looking over the 4 foot fence.


(3) Mourners have always been observable for anyone walking through or around the graveyard (or indeed from anyone looking over the fences on Wood Vale or Langton Rise).


(4) The run along the boundary by Underhill is no longer being used to dump odd bits of rubbish (because it is now very visible). And I am informed that a number of people feel safer walking along that boundary because they are not worried about anyone concealed by the fence who might jump out at them (at night that's a genuine worry).


(5) The vista now offered by the (quite elegant) iron railing is a deal sight more charming that that of the wooden fence - and the view through to the cemetery is very attractive.


[6] Many cemeteries around here are 'open' to view through railings - it is arguable that awareness of mortality is not a bad thing, rather than hiding the evidence away. And grief is not something to be ashamed of.

I totally agree Polly, grieving should be if wished, a private affair not a public one...and I don't recall anyone saying they are ashamed of it either.




PollyG Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Agreed. Do you think the council could arrange for

> some planting/screening to go behind the railings

> to create some privacy for mourners- it seems very

> public now for what should be a very private

> affair. Any idea which department this would fall

> under?

The only people I know who chose to be buried (which is, admittedly, not many) chose it partly because it 'is' a public, permanent and living memorial - 'here I am' - as opposed to scattered on a hilltop or whatever.


From a non-mourning point of view, I like seeing cemeteries and think the changes are a big improvement.


Perhaps a few well-spaced / carefully placed ornamental trees would be a good compromise?

Hi all,

This project has been done by Cemeteries in conjunction with the Service Development. The low wooden fence had led to continual dumping issues; bags of builders' rubble and rubbish were regularly being dumped by throwing them over the wooden fence. The new railings are higher so this has stopped, the only rubbish now being the odd can being pushed between the railings. There would have originally been railings. Many railings were removed and melted down for use in armament's factories during the second world war. This came out of the Cemeteries budget.


In the stretch where there are no graves near the railings there has been planting of native species. This is an environmental measure to provide a habitat for wild life. This will take a couple of years to make an impact. The problem at the top is that there are some large trees and graves going quite close to the cemetery boundary. I have spoken to the Head of Service Development about this. I think that the way forward for this is that those of you who think additional planting is needed, that you apply for CGS funding for a project to do this. This would allow for more planting, where it can be done to give more privacy to those visiting graves of their loved ones.


I have spoken to Cemetery staff about this project and they say that they have had very positive feedback about the improved appearance and enhanced safety perceived by local residents. One resident stated that they previously would cross the road by the Cemetery when walking along Underhill Rd as they felt unsafe. Due to the increased height and visibility afforded by the railings they no longer do so.


Renata

I probably should have been clearer in my previous post. The railings are indeed a big improvement on the fence for many of the reasons mentioned above. My post was solely in relation to the final one third of the Underhill Road section which is very open and doesn't provide much privacy for those wishing to grieve privately to do so.


Bob- sounds as if trees would be a no-go from Renata's email. I'm not a horticulturist, but maybe some sort of flowers/plants along the border might be a good compromise between a bit more privacy and maintaining an attractive green space.


Renata- many thanks for taking the time to respond and for the information provided, much appreciated.

spot on PollyG...very constructive input.


PollyG Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I probably should have been clearer in my previous

> post. The railings are indeed a big improvement

> on the fence for many of the reasons mentioned

> above. My post was solely in relation to the final

> one third of the Underhill Road section which is

> very open and doesn't provide much privacy for

> those wishing to grieve privately to do so.

>

> Bob- sounds as if trees would be a no-go from

> Renata's email. I'm not a horticulturist, but

> maybe some sort of flowers/plants along the border

> might be a good compromise between a bit more

> privacy and maintaining an attractive green

> space.

>

> Renata- many thanks for taking the time to respond

> and for the information provided, much

> appreciated.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Girls In Your City - No Selfie - Anonymous Casual Dating https://SecreLocal.com [url=https://SecreLocal.com] Girls In Your City [/url] - Anonymous Casual Dating - No Selfie New Girls [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/vanessa-100.html]Vanessa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/vanessa-100.html]Vanessa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/molly-15.html]Molly[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/cheryl-blossom-48.html]Cheryl Blossom[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/carola-conymegan-116.html]Carola Conymegan[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/pupa-41.html]Pupa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/mia-candy-43.html]Mia Candy[/url]
    • This is a remarkable interpretation of history. Wikipedia (with more footnotes and citations than you could shake a shitty stick at sez: The austerity programme was initiated in 2010 by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition government. In his June 2010 budget speech, Osborne identified two goals. The first was that the structural current budget deficit would be eliminated to "achieve [a] cyclically-adjusted current balance by the end of the rolling, five-year forecast period". The second was that national debt as a percentage of GDP would fall. The government intended to achieve both of its goals through substantial reductions in public expenditure.[21] This was to be achieved by a combination of public spending cuts and tax increases amounting to £110 billion.[26] Between 2010 and 2013, the Coalition government said that it had reduced public spending by £14.3 billion compared with 2009–10.[27] Growth remained low, while unemployment rose. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_government_austerity_programme From memory, last time around they were against the LTNs and competing with the Tories to pick up backlash votes - both failed. They had no counterproposals or ideas about how to manage congestion or pollution. This time around they're simply silent on the matter: https://www.southwark-libdems.org.uk/your-local-lib-dem-team/goosegreen Also, as we have seen from Mr Barber's comments on the new development on the old Jewsons yard, "leading campaigns to protect the character of East Dulwich and Goose Green" is code for "blocking new housing".
    • @Insuflo NO, please no, please don't encourage him to post more often! 😒
    • Revealing of what, exactly? I resurrected this thread, after a year, to highlight the foolishness of the OP’s op. And how posturing would be sagacity is quickly undermined by events, dear boy, events. The thread is about Mandelson. I knew he was a wrong ‘un all along, we all did; the Epstein shit just proves it. In reality, Kinnock, Blair, Brown, Starmer et all knew as well but accepted it, because they found him useful. As did a large proportion of the 2024 intake of Labour MPs who were personally vetted and approved by Mandelson.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...