Given the amount of information in this thread about the regeneration of the park, I’m really surprised you felt the need to ask. It is most definitely regeneration, not redevelopment. There has been a regrettable degree of nimbyism about objections to the regeneration. Dog owners (myself included) have had the benefit of a hugely under-used public space for many years where we can let our dogs off-leash and not really worry about what they are up to. The regeneration includes facilities for all the community and that does mean that we dog walkers will have to curtail our dogs’ freedoms in the park somewhat (or get them better trained!), but the overall benefit to the community must surely out-weigh that inconvenience.
For balance, here are some photos I took this morning of the ranks of newly planted saplings.
It was your need to ask that surprised me, given all the information and links are already here. Not your normal modus operandi. I admit, though, that the propagation of falsehoods about the regeneration really bothers me and I do tend to bang on about it if the subject comes up.
It’s good that Lewisham know people are scrutinising what’s being done, because oversight is important. Beckenham Place Park is an incredibly important environmental resource and needs to be treated with respect.
Re the lake: they are re-excavating an existing lake. The stand of young trees that had filled in the lake are not part of the ancient woodland. Mostly ash that grows like a weed. However, the heavy diggers are making a horrendous mess and it all looks rather brutal.
In the ancient woodland, a substantial area of scrub under the trees has been cleared, which is a big concern for existing wildlife. It is being transformed into a wetland habitat, which seems a little bizarre in a woodland.
A few old and problematic trees have been taken out of the woodland, but only a handful. As I posted before, hundreds of young trees were planted last year to fill in areas of the woodland encroached on by the golf course. As far as I know there are no plans to remove many more trees from the ancient woodland.
Overall we need continued scrutiny but not panic, and for people to pick their battles to make sure Lewisham are held accountable where it matters. I said this to the people concerned about the large flock of parakeets that might be affected - good, I say! You can’t hear the native birds over the screeching of the interlopers.
Lets not make this political. Immigrant populations established over generations have as much right to be here as any other. Those parakeets were born British.
Does anyone know if those are silver birch? If so they’re not looking healthy. The typical lifespan of silver birch is 80 years so I’d wonder if these are marked for removal on plant health reasons.
There’s something about felling trees that really makes people feel emotional, me included.
However, the parkland at Beckenham Place Park is not the same as the ancient woodland. The parkland is an artificial landscape planted up some 100 years ago. So yes, there will be mature-looking trees there like silver birch which are not long-lived and which should have been felled and replaced in an ongoing programme over the decades. The parkland was designed in a time when the owner of the ‘big house’ would have employed skilled groundsmen and gardeners to maintain a rolling programme of planting and felling of these ornamental trees.
I really understand how upsetting this is for people. I have lost four of my own trees in the past two years due to honey fungus infection. Those of my neighbours who don’t know why I had to have healthy-looking trees removed probably think I’m a vandal. In truth I’m heartbroken.
The active management and change of sections of the park is a very positive thing, after years of neglect and underinvestment. The landscape is already very largely artificially shaped by its previous users and this is simply continuing its evolution.There does not seem much merit in leaving it or trees nearing the end of their natural lifespan to their own devices. Would we argue against planned park management in other large parks - say Greenwich? Hyde Park?
The lake is a puzzle to me though. Walking by the hole yesterday I could see the size and shape of it and I thought it will become a very attractive feature, but open water swimming? won’t it be quickly colonised by water fowl? Though that might be pleasant to look at, I find it hard to imagine anyone swimming there.
