Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Dear all - I am very sorry to start a new thread on this old subject, but once again we seem to have been diverted down sterile paths of false debate. I asked 3 questions (following the most recent council decision on the future of Camberwell Old and New Cemeteries) - which I still would seek an opinion on and positive discussion about, which I am re-posting from the old thread I started, which keeps now returning like a dog to its vomit to made-up stupidities about discrimination:-



(1) Is there a proper plan to address ponding and run-off in times (I know, doesn't seem likely at the moment) of heavy and continuous rain? I had hoped for the installation of a field drainage system, but with the site being sealed off it is difficult to know what is being done. There would be issues of course of disturbing burials, but less so if the drains can be installed under mounding.


(2) What are the replanting plans for the sites once the clearance and preparation for new burials work is complete - tree and shrub species etc.? What is the underlying ecological philosophy behind this (native species against issues of climate change, ornament or utility etc.)?


(3) What are the plans, if any, for conservation of those memorials which are still fit to be conserved? Many cemeteries place 'old' memorials around the perimeter of the graveyard, is that, or anything, planned here?


As I have always said, there are genuine issues with Southwark's plans that need addressing, just not the ones over which there has been most heat (and least light).

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

    • Has it  been more  of an absolute shambles ever since the council took back management?
    • You miss the point entirely. The motivations of the the BBC's victims are irrelevant. You are advocating that their failure to be impartial is justified because you disagree politically with the people they are inaccurate about. This is the whole problem.  They don't make these "mistakes" with Starmer / the Greens / Davey because they agree with everything those people say. 
    • So... you saw them then? In spite of them having no lights (and presumably being dressed in all black / coming out of nowhere / insert any other standard anti-cyclist trope here). I've long thought that the best way of being visible as a cyclist is to wear all black, have no lights and to ride on the pavement (or jump red lights). Not only does literally *everyone* see you, they pop onto the local forum to complain about you! On the other hand if you dress in all yellow and get T-boned, the driver will still manage to say "sorry mate, I didn't see you". 😉
    • Fine dude - you do you. I dont think you have the slightest interest in the BBC (whereas clearly HeadNun dos) other than its elimination.  If it made these mistakes against starmer/davey/greens whoever I doubt you would get as upset. It’s all very “bring a pen to Brexit referendum because they can rub out pencil  votes” (“but strafe!! Dave hasn’t said any of these things on here  and if you suggest he does elsewhere you have no proof!”  This is true! And yet here we are ) I’ll ask again. Why do you think lowe said foreigner and domestic.  Instead of just “criminals”?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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