Jump to content

Dulwich Crossroads Tree and Memorial


Ruskin

Recommended Posts

I see that the tree at the Village crossroads (opposite the schools) has been taken down by tree surgeons this morning. Was it diseased/unstable - and, seeing as its days before Remembrance Sunday, what of the memorial to the young Welsh Guard, Mark Evison?


https://www.londonremembers.com/memorials/mark-evison


Are there plans to reinstate the memorial and perhaps plant another tree?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, thanks for letting us know, I've been keeping my eye on it but haven't been down there today... there has been a series of discussions about this over the months.


The tree and the memorial are separate, albeit interacting (as we try to do whenever possible). I had a Foxglove tree planted there a few years ago as an experiment to replace the previous dead tree when I was a councillor and then the Dulwich Society applied for a CGS bid for the bench and plaque, so it all fit together (FYI, Conways implemented the granite setts around the tree and bench for free to make the area more useable and visually enhanced).


Just as the Foxglove was really beginning to look amazing over the past couple of years (the purple blossoms are spectacular, hence our decision to plant one in this prime location), the tree suddenly died at the beginning of last spring. We think the road junction works in the Village and the subsequent salting of the pavements during the snow was too much for the fragile tree to cope with.


After we gave the tree a chance to see if it would re-establish over the summer, the council's tree officer agreed to replant another Foxglove in the spring of 2019. But the shopkeepers campaigned in discussions with the Dulwich Estate to have a large specimen spruce Christmas tree planted there which would still have the bench and plaque set up around it, but could be decorated at Christmas to give the area around the parade character.


But after objections from other residents, the Dulwich Estate cancelled the spruce due to the memorial bench (which I don't think they realised would be reinstated), so I arranged a meeting last week between the shopkeepers and the council tree officer, as technically this is Southwark Council's land and the Estate don't have the final say.


But, after a technical discussion on site, the traders agreed to keep with a new Foxglove to be planted in the spring... but it transpired that there was going to be a Christmas event in this location on Dec 2nd, which was just before the tree was meant to be cut down, and they wanted to put lights in the tree for Christmas.


So the tree officer agreed to have the tree cut down at the end of November, but it sounds like the council felling team had a slot today...? The idea is that the traders will insert a live Christmas tree into the trunk of the felled tree trunk and decorate that in order to circumvent council contractor time constraints.


FYI, the bench was removed some time ago in preparation for the felling and will be reinstated after the new tree is planted, but synchronising everything is difficult due to council contractor schedules.


BTW, I had another Foxglove planted on the grass verge next to Gail's to visually bookend that section of the Village where the dead Foxglove will be replanted, so that there will be continuity to the landscaping.


This is probably more information than you wanted to know... but there's quite a complex planting scheme that has been developed in the Village and East Dulwich over the past decade (starting with the avenue of plane trees in Lordship Lane), some of which have been noted in books and magazines as this makes Dulwich unique. I have been liaising with local councillors over the years so that they are aware of the bigger picture and post on this forum when I have time, and have set up a group of residents to help me water the new specimens during the droughts... you can often see me walking around with my Red Bucket.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

    • Hi Everyone … I've been a cleaner for 17 years, I work punctually and responsibly, leaving  your home is clean and organized. The experience includes: *Private Houses *High cleaning standards. *Ironing  *Deep Cleaner  *5 star Airbnb    Send me a message and booking a  trial. And get a DISCOUNT 😀 📲07889693871 (WhatsApp Just)   Thanks  Gra
    • Ok here goes.....   Since day 1 of the LTNs the emergency services have been very clear - blocked roads increase response times. Southwark councillors were more than aware of this from the beginning of the LTN debacle during Covid because, when the council were going LTN mad and were trying to carpet bomb them everywhere they had suggested one for Peckham Rye and had initiated a consultation. As usual they took glowing endorsements of their proposal to close parts of Peckham Rye from the cycle lobby but got negative feedback from TFL and the emergency services due to the disruption their physical closure barriers were going to have - the emergency services made their preference clear that they do not like physical barriers. Needless to say Southwark ignored that emergency service input and pushed ahead with their plans only to cancel them when the realised LTNs were turning residents against them.   Now the video below (from March 2021) is interesting from a couple of perspectives: 1) Clearly LAS were making their feelings on permanent closures very clear to Southwark - please scroll to 1 hour 4 minutes to hear from them - 51 of the 170 delays caused by LTNs in London were in Southwark - yet it took over a year for emergency vehicles to be given access and, if I remember correctly FOIs showed that LAS had been writing to Dale Foden and the council alerting them to the delays. So why the delay and why is there a constant narrative from local lobby groups that the junction has to be closed to ALL traffic (including emergency vehicles) and why the new designs return to a partial full closure of the junction - most rational and pragmatic people can surely see that the compromise installed in 2022 to allow emergency vehicle access was the most sensible approach.   The council put the desires of local lobby groups ahead of the emergency services...which is madness...and then that leads us to point 2)....   2) Notice the presence of Jeremy Leach on the call - not a councillor but the Co-Optee of the council's environmental scrutiny committee and he is constantly pushing the councillors to do more to deal with traffic issues and reduce traffic. I suspect he is deemed one of the "expert" voices the council was turning to for guidance at this period. But, much like the activist researchers the council turned to Jeremy is very much an "activist expert" and was chair of the London Living Streets, co-founder of Action Vision Zero and part of Southwark Cyclists - so you can see why if the council was taking guidance and direction from him how they may have not been making decisions in the public interest. Clearly someone has convinced the council that the junction needs to be closed to all vehicles as there cannot be any other explanation for why they held out for so long (that created increased response times) - remember they are wasting another £1.5m to close one arm of the roads permanently again - honestly if someone wants to enlighten me to a part of this story I am missing then feel free but to me it looks like something very odd has been going on at the DV junction and the council is ignoring the majority and listening to the few...   https://lrscconference.org.uk/index.php/agenda-speakers/jeremy-leach-co-founder-action-vision-zero/     No it was 64% of the total who lived in the consultation area - 57% when the council looked at all the respondents to the consultation.   3,162 (64%) wanted it returned to its original state 823 (17%) wanted it retained as was 422 (8%) wanted a different measure installed 564 (11%) wanted the measure, but modify/ enhance it with other features   So back then the 11% got their wish!   In every consultation in relation to the DV junction there has been overwhelming rejection of the council's plans by local residents - yet they carry-on wasting our money on it regardless - just who are they trying to placate?
    • Calton was particularly hideous. An ambulance wouldn’t have got anywhere fast.   
    • Not clear what point you are trying to make here Earl? A majority of those consulted wanted measures returned to their original state. Majority is the salient point. Again, if consultations are pretty irrelevent, as you seem to suggest, then why do oragnisations like Southwark Cyclists repeatedly prompt their members, whether local to the consultation area or not, to respond to consultations on CPZ or LTNs. What a waste of everyone's time if of no import in terms of local policy-making.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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