Flooding at Camberwell Old Cemetery

[fl0wer]

Masses of Council [i.e.taxpayers'] money was allocated last year, to upgrade the Camberwell Old Cemetery site.

We have been over this several times already in the EDF, but I feel now is a good moment for an itemised bill which all of us can see.

It is remarkable:

1. how ineffective the new drainage works are proving to be.

Few of the unevennesses around the gravesides - which groundsmen have orders to strim continuously in the summer 'in case people trip up', thus wrecking the grass's value for biodiversity - have been cured.

2. how ugly tarmac looks on the roadways, how brutally the lopping of trees and shrubs was carried out.

3. that NO recycling of mixed materials such as plastic and spent bouquets, grass cuttings, glass and other waste has been organised. The big bins are destined for landfill. People, we are all paying a premium rate for this. We are neither too stupid to learn how to sort waste, nor to ask for floral tributes to be made with 100% biodegradable materials.

I wonder where ratepayers draw a line between 'value for money' from Southwark Council's own gardeners, choices of engineers and landscaping firms and tree surgeons, and 'hopeless London clay' which might never be really suitable for burial grounds anyway.

In future as the UK contends with weather extremes like this, will families be happy to see memorials reduced to these present conditions? It will soon be far more peaceful and conducive to dignity to scatter ashes in thriving, gently managed woodland. We appreciate that burial is a requirement in some religions. It looks as though this method of laying the dead to rest needs thorough reassessment in relation to this site.

Is Southwark planning merely to raze the rest of its greenery, and dump fresh, expensive new topsoil and commercial mono-culture turf wherever the existing graves fall out of their time lapse? This is what was achieved with the 2,000 new plots of last winter's industry - acres as soul-less and municipal as dormitories.

[Clare11]

Unrelated perhaps, but seeing the destruction of the woodland area in this cemetery breaks my heart.

Not only because of the damage to habitat, that is a rarity in London, but also the complete disrespect of previous grave sites.

There are many old headstones that have been turned over amongst the destruction. I guess it all comes down to money for the council, as opposed to dignity of previous graves, or management of wooded areas.

[fl0wer]

I agree about the habitat aspect Clare.

Sorry to say though that old monuments & headstones usually topple as time, soft soil and encroaching plants dictate.

Unless families continue to spend money on masonry repairs.

Also not to put too fine a point on it but as decomposition takes place there s always subsidence & coffins collapse - and the clay soil will shift. This is why some mourners wait for a year or two before having a gravestone installed.

To my way of thinking we have here another good reason for choosing cremation, in all built-up areas short of wild green space.

Elsewhere in the world there are traditions of 'ossuaries', for taking care of ancestral bones respectfully and still allowing for graveyards to be used and re-used over centuries.

[Laur]

I'm still waiting to put a headstone on a loved ones grave but due to the constant flooding can't!!!

And I agree with you clare11 its a shame seeing the woodland area destroyed especially when there are still some graves being tended to there.

[Clare11]

Yes, I understand things shift, but from looking over the fence from Underhill Road, it appears these particular headstones have been 'trampled' by the council works going on. I wasn't aware, but not suprised there are graves throughout the wooded area, it's just sad that no one can be bothered to pick them up and place them out of the way in their quest for reuse/destruction of the site.

It would be lovely if someone could devise a 'vertical internment' option. Perhaps and 'tree-esque' vessel with compartments for ashes to be interned. That way the trees that are already there could be left and these structures could sit alongside them, complimenting the landscape. Loved ones could then visit their relatives/friends in a beautiful woodland setting that hasn't been raised to the ground for burials.

Of course I do realise burials are required in some cultures and religions, but just an idea for cremations.

[Laur]

completely agree with you Clare11 ...sometimes the council workers/diggers have no regard for headstones, especially if there are no longer relatives around....I know of a really ornate one which was damaged by their digger.

****oh and don't get me started on the selfish dogowners that allow their unleashed dogs to trample all over loved ones graves & knock all the flowers etc over****

[fl0wer]

I feel it would be reasonable to ask for all those ancient stones to be gathered up for a long-lasting structure which is part of the memorial site, eg a properly assembled drystone wall (lovely for biodiversity) and a paved walkway, showing all the fragmented lettering.

Just to remind us that 300,000 people are already sleeping here.

[Clare11]

That is such a lovely idea fl0wer.

Redundant headstones and memorials should be salvaged for some purpose. Bulldozing over history like this seems really disrespectful.

[KidKruger]

1/3 million people buried in Camberwell Old Cemetary ?!

300,000 corpses ?

[Peckhamrye]

30,000 I think.

[Laur]

300,000

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camberwell_Cemeteries

http://moderngov.southwarksites.com/mgConvert2PDF.aspx?ID=18436

[fl0wer]

yes, and from Southwark Council's website

"By 1984, 300,000 burials had been carried out at the cemetery. Camberwell New Cemetery was founded in 1901 in order to provide more space. The majority of burials now take place in this cemetery."

[sallyfran]

I'm guessing that they are clearing the wooded area to make room for more burials there. It wasn't that long ago that there was talk of using some of the park space round Brenchley Gardens for new burial space (can't remember where exactly). If people are still wanting local burials, I'd far rather that the council maximised existing cemetery space (even at the expense of losing some trees and 'wild' areas) than took up new space elsewhere. I don't know about the efficacy of the drainage work but it might have been a lot worse without it. Peckham Rye park is currently flooded in lots of places despite huge works when the park was regenerated a few years ago, though it's miles better than it used to be.

[binary_star]

KidKruger Wrote:

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

> 1/3 million people buried in Camberwell Old

> Cemetary ?!

> 300,000 corpses ?

"When you buy a grave in one of Southwark's cemeteries, you buy the 'exclusive right of burial' for that particular grave and this lasts for a period of 50 years."

Graves can be re-used after 75yrs.

[Calsug]

I have to agree with all the comments on this post - I called Southwark council after receiving the notification letter that work was to be carried out and was assured that it was be minor scrub clearance, that the treeline would be maintained etc...

If you look at it now its a total mess and I'm pretty upset that the council lied about how much tree removal would take place. I don't know who is in charge of this sham of a project but it highlights the councils blatant disregard for tree preservation throughout the Borough.

[KidKruger]

That's 7.5 people a day, every day, since 1856.

Given that the highest frequency of deaths would have been earlier in the period since this cemetary opened in 1854, the numbers would have to have been far higher, perhaps into the 20's per day.

That might be what Wiki/council website says, but I'm not convinced the total is as high as that. Fair enough for quoting the site though, it's the obvious source to use.

[jimbo1964]

I went for a walk through there yesterday. I agree it is a mess at the moment. It probably doesn't help that there is a lot of subsidence and general bogginess. I have been told that once the works are finished they will be replanting some trees and shrubs. Fingers crossed.

[fl0wer]

Have taken a set of pics to illustrate. If anyone needs this material to help with a campaign please let me know.

But my original comment reflects a sense that Southwark Council is being ripped off by its contractors. I think the bills need scrutiny.

And East Dulwich residents need to stick up for this much-loved woodland space too - not necessarily by doing nothing at all to it, BTW.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Genuinely democratic planning could achieve BOTH the civilised conditions for folk to bury loved ones and not find gravesites afloat every winter, AND unspoilt quietly managed woodland area for remembrance after scattering ashes. It shouldn't be a matter of either/or.

We need not buy into arguments that ED already has plenty of designated nature reserves nearby, eg One Tree Hill, Sydenham Woods, etc, suggesting that therefore it's permissible to bulldoze and dormitorify this one. Wildlife needs (& surely Council HQs already know this) green corridors that creatures can easily travel across. Without such pathways their territories become islands, stranded in the middle of urban development. Here they suffer loss of genetic strength and soon die out.

The Cemetery is included on the Green Chain network, reflecting this corridor idea.

Recording such animals, birds and invertebrates as we do see, with dates/ times/ exact location, especially butterflies and their food plants, can help protect this land adequately. The Wildlife Trust, RSPB, Butterfly Conservation groups are all keen to offer support rather than endless criticism to the London Councils, who have a huge task to perform.

[PeckhamRose]

kidkruger I believe that burials were not just from the local area but were from all over London and Kent/Surrey especially in the earlier years of its existence.

[KidKruger]

PR I may well be wrong but I just don't see how you fit 1/3 million corpses in that small space - the maths don't work for me.

[unlurked]

fl0wer Wrote:

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

> Masses of Council money was allocated last year,

> to upgrade the Camberwell Old Cemetery site.

>

> We have been over this several times already in

> the EDF, but I feel now is a good moment for an

> itemised bill which all of us can see.

>

> It is remarkable:

> 1. how ineffective the new drainage works are

> proving to be.

> Few of the unevennesses around the gravesides -

> which groundsmen have orders to strim continuously

> in the summer 'in case people trip up', thus

> wrecking the grass's value for biodiversity - have

> been cured.

>

> 2. how ugly tarmac looks on the roadways, how

> brutally the lopping of trees and shrubs was

> carried out.

>

> 3. that NO recycling of mixed materials such as

> plastic and spent bouquets, grass cuttings, glass

> and other waste has been organised. The big bins

> are destined for landfill. People, we are all

> paying a premium rate for this. We are neither too

> stupid to learn how to sort waste, nor to ask for

> floral tributes to be made with 100% biodegradable

> materials.

>

> I wonder where ratepayers draw a line between

> 'value for money' from Southwark Council's own

> gardeners, choices of engineers and landscaping

> firms and tree surgeons, and 'hopeless London

> clay' which might never be really suitable for

> burial grounds anyway.

> In future as the UK contends with weather extremes

> like this, will families be happy to see memorials

> reduced to these present conditions? It will soon

> be far more peaceful and conducive to dignity to

> scatter ashes in thriving, gently managed

> woodland. We appreciate that burial is a

> requirement in some religions. It looks as though

> this method of laying the dead to rest needs

> thorough reassessment in relation to this site.

> Is Southwark planning merely to raze the rest of

> its greenery, and dump fresh, expensive new

> topsoil and commercial mono-culture turf wherever

> the existing graves fall out of their time lapse?

> This is what was achieved with the 2,000 new plots

> of last winter's industry - acres as soul-less and

> municipal as dormitories.

Although not his ward, am sure J Barber could get answers to this, after all ED people buried there. Agree, Fl0wer.

[fl0wer]

They're buried on average 4 deep, because this Cem has been in use for such a long time. I didn't believe it at first either, then it affected the feeling of walking through.

On line you can research some of its more chaotic past.

ED local-specific topic just for now is the cost & quality of recent Council 'works', and whether they answer our genuine needs.

[Peckhamgatecrasher]

Don't forget that quite a few would have been paupers' graves which would have several bodies and/ or be reused again quite quickly.

[unlurked]

Camberwell New Cem' also had expensive drainage just put in, and it's completely not working. The graves have been flooded for a couple of weeks now. What will the council do i wonder.

[mynamehere]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retention_basin

http://www.susdrain.org

http://www.intechopen.com/download/get/type/pdfs/id/10998

I dispare t the lack of political imagination, will, intellect, foresight, leadership based on integrated/ analysed knowledge and so forth.

We could, almost, have "it all" but we hire in politicians who crave control and who groom contractors for their own benefit