Jump to content

Recommended Posts

That's the point...


The designated area between Sydenham Hill (road) and the disused railway line is a woodland re-colonisation on the extensive gardens of the large 19th century mansions. I don't think there is anything "ancient" about it at all.


I used to play there 50+ years ago. Perhaps it was clearer to see then.


Did any one else play there who can confirm this?


In the absence of any evidence I think it is a mis-designation.


As I said before, I'll be happy to be proved wrong.


John K

edhistory Wrote:

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

> The designated area between Sydenham Hill (road)

> and the disused railway line is a woodland

> re-colonisation on the extensive gardens of the

> large 19th century mansions. I don't think there

> is anything "ancient" about it at all.


Happily, whether it's been continuous or replanted doesn't matter for the official definition.

"In the 1870s large Victorian villas with extensive gardens were established on Sydenham Hill, and the wood is now a unique mix of old woodland, Victorian garden survivors and recent woodland."


So where is this "old woodland", or is it only old like me?


It's not the former railway land, nor the Victorian gardens.


Interesting mis-use of the word "demonstrate" in your quotation.


John K

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

    • What a ridiculous plan. If this is to stop traffic "cutting through" where do they think it is now going to "cut through" via? Has the council produced any data on the scale of the problem on Ryedale - anything to back up their hypothesis? You cannot do these things in isolation as all it does is displaces traffic elsewhere. Dunstans is going to become awful - I feel for the residents there. Councils should not be allowed to implement these experimental TMOs, they are clearly using them to circumvent proper planning and engagement. Has anyone contacted the local councillors about this? The laughable thing was the local ward councillors were concerned about displacement from the wider Dulwich LTNs on their ward so is this an indirect acknowledgement that they are being impacted?  Ridiculous.  
    • I would never leave my dog tied up outside a shop nowadays. A large proportion of ‘dogs stolen’ notices feature dogs nicked from outside shops- fancy dogs, old dogs, mongrels , all sorts. Stolen on a whim, for mischief, for profit or as a bait dog to train fighters. A thief might abandon them shortly afterwards, but the heartbreak and confusion is already done and a reunion not guaranteed.
    • It's a terrible idea, will damage trade in Forest Hill Road and is just creating a nice private road for someone to enjoy. Congestion in the road is caused mainly by delivery vans, well, let's help stamp out those scourges. And an 18 month trial is at least a year too long if you are just interested in judging impact. And there has been no consultation at all, save, perhaps, with the privileged Rydale-ers. I live a block away in Underhill and I've heard only via social media. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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