Revitalisation
There will be consultation opportunities in September to look at more detailed designs of the project including: entrances, boundaries, footpaths, signage, furniture, bins, railing removal and a circuit route; play opportunities, both formal and imaginative play; topography; biodiversity and ecology, trees, St. George’s Gardens, the New Church road wild area; and lake improvements. Dates and times to be announced by Southwark Council soon.As part of the delegation to the Southwark Council Burgess Park Revitalisation Project Board meeting on August 4th 2010, Sue Amos, the Chair of Friends of Burgess Park gave the following statement:
Friends of Burgess Park (FOBP) fully support improvement work to Burgess Park and will continue to work constructively on this project with Southwark Council and other local groups.
We appreciate the extra time that has allowed further discussion to develop proposals that build upon the strengths of the park, develop and enhance existing areas of biodiversity and strike a balance between necessity and cost.
The Friends of Burgess Park support the idea of developing a master plan with a longer term shared view of how the park needs to develop. But because the money (£4.5m which is available now from the Mayor of London and Aylesbury NDC) needs to be spent very soon the FOBP believe that the focus has to be on the work to be undertaken now alongside making sure that the park continues to function for local residents.
The FOBP remit is to promote, protect and enhance the park. Our areas of concern are broad. We aim to represent a wide section of the community rather than specific interests or a single cause.
Following on from the consultation work completed in 2009, we developed four main areas of concern in the park: play, wildlife, safety, maintenance.
We are also concerned that proposed costs are high, and whether some proposals could be scaled down to ensure we achieve the necessary general improvement and revitalization of the park.
Whilst we acknowledge there are issues relating to further land acquisition and securing boundaries, we understand this is not something the £4.5M will fund. We hope though that these issues will be taken up immediately in Phase 2.
We are confident that most of the new proposals address these issues and we outline in detail below those elements with which we still have some concern as well as those we are in agreement with.
AREAS OF CONCERN
Play and family friendly areas – although play has developed considerably, there are no specified ‘Family Friendly’ areas. These are areas that are secure and dog free, for informal picnicking and play, rather like the arboretum area in Peckham Rye. They could be part of an extended playground area.
Informal sports – the sports hub is already managed, but what about the large open area currently used by the Latin American leagues. Should general park maintenance carry the cost for them? If one group dominates, and makes the space their own, they need to contribute to costs of repair.
They need to be encouraged to rotate the use of the space.
Space should be monitored and rented, to pay for ongoing maintenance, toilets, rubbish collection.
Informal football space needs to be open to all.
Wildlife
Needs to strike a balance between accessibility and safety with habitat provision. Russia Dock woodland proposed as a well maintained and attractive precedent.
Which groups will be brought in to advise and assist with maintenance. The Friends would like to see a number of groups engaged along with Groundwork, such as TrUE, LWT, BTCV and others. This will extend opportunities for varied community engagement.
Lake – Is it possible that some of the funding for could be sourced from elsewhere?
Safety / crime
We do not want a reliance on CCTV. We would like evidence that safety will be designed in.
Maintenance
Maintenance should be closely allied with design. When will we have confirmation of a maintenance strategy that ensures that every design element has been thought through in terms of maintenance costs and feasibility.
Entrances
Cost of Old Kent Road – how much should be spent here? Does there need to be a complete levelling of the entrance way or could it be partially excavated to provide clear access through whilst retaining the buffering slopes.
We think the scale of intervention needs to be balanced realistically with costs.
We agree that the Southampton Way entrance should take precedence over Trafalgar Avenue. Trafalgar Avenue is a crossing between the park areas, just like Wells Way and needs to be rationalised, not treated as an entrance.
Cycle routes – these need to be tied in around whole of park. Is there a strategy developed or in development regarding this?
There is some concern over a cut through route at the western end of the park – will cyclists be encouraged to use new routes?
Events – existing and proposed events need to make money for the park as in other boroughs.
Sustainability
Needs to be developed as a theme with a complete emphasis on every level in regards to
lighting, recycling, power generation, composting, borehole etc.
Detail design
Is expert advice being taken on proposed elements such as play? If so, by whom? We do not want a repeat of the Chumleigh playground where play seemed to factor lower than traffic.
Steering groups.
FoBP want to ensure that these opportunities are provided in the following sectors so a representative of our group can attend:
play, safety, food and growing, biodiversity and planting, furniture and surfaces, including lighting.
AGREE
Converting redundant roads to park, including Canal St, Calmington Rd and part of Neate St.
Improving entrances and boundaries, at the Old Kent Road, Camberwell Road and Southampton Way. We believe Trafalgar Avenue links the park, but rather like the Wells Way crossing, does not constitute an entrance.
Improving accessibility and footpaths, including a new main footpath from the Old Kent Road through to Chumleigh Gardens. This includes the sight line through to St Georges Church.
Repairing and reshaping the lake.
Planting new gardens at St. George's Way
Enhancing biodiversity through an overall increase of at least 200 new trees and creating more, and improved, areas for wildlife.
Introducing a play area for older children to the east of Chumleigh Gardens.
Installing new signage, seating and litter bins. Railings could be refurbished and we do not think they are a priority for Phase 1.
Expanding the New Church Road 'wildlife' area.
Creating a new 5km fitness circuit for runners, cyclists and walkers. This should be extended to include the outlying areas of park including the Glengall Rd area.
Recycling existing site materials within the park.
Food growing area at near the Surrey Canal Walk.
Outdoor gyms and satellite play areas.
National standard BMX track.
We also agree with the proposals to;
Readjust the scale of the landscaping, in order to preserve wildlife.
No redevelopment of the original canal.
Leave the underpass as it is, until a safe alternate strategy can be put in place.
Keep the sports hub near Neate St in its current state. We do not want to see large expansion of the sports hub in later phases.
Preserve and improve the space behind Chumleigh Gardens.
Preserve the trees along Wells Way, the Canal Walk, Cobourg Rd and the tree clumps along St. George's Way.
Keep the hillocky landscape between the lake and Old Kent Road.
Preserve the northern clump of trees on Calmington Rd with work to improve accessibility and increasing biodiversity.
In response to the latest round of consultation the council and LDA architects presented a revised proposal for the improvements to Burgess Park (20 July 2010). In response to that, the Friends made the following statement.
Friends of Burgess Park (FOBP) fully support improvement work to Burgess Park and will continue to work constructively on this project with Southwark Council and other local groups.
The Friends of Burgess Park support the idea of developing a master plan with a longer term shared view of how the park needs developing. But because the money (£4.5m which is available now from the Mayor of London and Aylesbury NDC) needs to be spent very soon FOBP believe that the focus has to be on the work to be undertaken now alongside making sure that the park continues to function for local residents.
The latest changes to the plan go a long way to take on board the views of FOBP and other local groups.
Link to the Southwark Council web page where the latest plans are detailed.
FOBP want any park revitalisation work to also have a maintenance plan so that it is properly looked after.
Friends of Burgess Park will develop a more detailed response to the revised proposals and this will be on our website soon [see above] and circulated to local groups.
We must all continue to work together to plan for future phases of work and the funding for the work.
Southwark Council are still consulting on the project. Don't miss out on these opportunities to get involved. Go to the Southwark Council consultations page.
Councillor Barrie Hargrove has written on the Southwark website that 'The
latest plan is not set in stone - there is still time for you to have
your say on the future of the park, before any plans are finalised.' in
the Peckham Residents' Blogspot
he added, 'We think there is general agreement on converting redundant
roads to park, improving entrances and boundaries, improving
accessibility and footpaths, planting new gardens at St. George's Way,
introducing a play area for older children, and installing new signage,
seating, litter bins, and new railings and so we propose these should
go ahead.
However, there were mixed opinions on areas such as
biodiversity and sports provision, location of play and adventure
areas, when to improve the lake, and whether to do the canal, and as a
result we have made some changes.
We will now not be removing
the trees along Canal Walk, St George's Way and Cobourg Road, we will
not be reinstating the canal, we will not be filling in the underpass
and we will not be expanding the sport hub, among others.'
Des Waters, Southwark Council's Head of Public Realm, has encouraged everyone to comment on the Burgess Park Facebook page
People's Republic of Southwark: Burgess Park, a considerably better one
Evolution Quarter: Discuss the plans for Burgess Park
The Friends of Burgess Park consultation
The Friends of Burgess Park hosted a consultation event on the plans for Burgess Park. We heard directly from the designers and shared our hopes and concerns about the future of the park. As park users, we are the people who know Burgess Park best: problem areas as well as the bits that already work well and don't require expensive changes.
Thank you to everyone who attended and contributed to the consultation, sent pictures and added their comments to our online survey. Attached you can read the presentation that the Friends of Burgess Park gave at the consultation.
Our presentation and your comments were sent to Southwark Council as well as local councillors and MPs.
Ruth Miller, the Burgess Park project manager, said that the 26 May version of the masterplan would take our presentation into account. Responses to this masterplan were due by 10 June.
The Friends of Burgess Park consultation headlines
- Funds are limited and only a certain amount can be achieved in the budget - so how will the first phase of development change our park? Will it work as a coherent space, or will it feel 'half done'? What should be top priority in the first phase? What's the plan for maintenance?
- How do the plans benefit all the different communities around Burgess Park? Are there enough play areas for all age groups? Are the plans serving the sports clubs enough? Does everyone like the linear design?
- Hot spots: How can we improve the area where Wells Way crosses the park? How can the extremities of the Park be made to feel like they belong? Eg Surrey Canal Walk, and the islands of parkland towards the Old Kent Road (between Cobourg Road and Trafalgar Avenue or between Trafalgar Avenue & Glengall Road).
- We need to preserve the natural resources that we already have in the park. There are wild areas and maturing and mature trees which should provide the backbone of any development.
The plans so far
Southwark Council announced that LDA Design was awarded the contract to carry out the £6m revitalisation of Burgess Park, the winner of the Mayor of London's ‘Premier Park' competition.
After a consultation period, Southwark project manager Ruth Miller, said that the preference for LDA Design by the project board and stakeholders was 'unequivocal'.
She also said that the next key stage will be design development, in which stakeholders, including Friends of Burgess Park, will have ongoing involvement.
Children from Cobourg School (above) helped to celebrate the announcement of the winners.
During March/April 2010 Burgess Park was investigated for ground water and soil contamination. Engineers Conisbees aided by C L Voelcker were drilling in the park.
Some stakeholders are concerned that Burgess Park is under threat from the revitalisation plans: Elephant Amenity Network,
People's Republic of Southwark, Camberwell online blog. Other groups are supportive of the plans, like Evolution Quarter.
The Friends of Burgess Park also provided the results of our 2009 consultation to the steering committee to provide data on which to base the requirements for the park plan.
Southwark Council's revitalisation process is outlined here.
Read the article by Jean Sackur writing in the Camberwell Society's Quarterly about her concerns for the remedial work which needs to be carried out in Burgess Park and suggestions for a future strategy.
The Camberwell Quarterly is available for £1 from local newsagents.
And in Southwark News
CAMPAIGNER'S FEARS OVER PARK FUTURE
And on London SE1 community website
Burgess Park Redevelopment what do SE1ers wantpage 1
Burgess Park Redevelopment what do SE1ers wantpage
LDA Design won the contract to carry out the £6m revitalisation of Burgess Park, the winner of the Mayor of London's ‘Premier Park' competition.
UP projects won the Southwark Counci contract to deliver the art in Burgess Park strategy during the first phase of the Revitalisation Project working with LDA, [and] identifying opportunities for art within the infrastructure of the park as well as an ongoing art programme.