OUR PROPOSALS FOR THE FUTURE

Please note this page was written during 2006 whilst we were at an early stage in developing the Trust's plans for the future improvement of our services and facilities at Abney Park. Full copies of the plans are on display in the Visitor's Centre. Please view these. 

Introduction to draft 1 (15 March 2006) 

• Context
• The Study Plans  
• Main Issues in draft 1
• Conservation Management Plan
• Audience Development Plan
• Access Plan
• The Trust's Proposals in draft 1
• Proposal 1: Chapel & Chapel Lawns Restoration
• Proposal 2: Entrance-way Acquisition & Redecoration
• Proposal 3: Neglected Monument Scheme
• Proposal 4: Replanting of Arboretum
• Proposal 5: Re-surfaced Paths in Southern half of the Park
• Proposal 6: Restoration of Axial Vista and Birch Heath
• Proposal 7: New Disabled Access, Church Street
• Proposal 8: Stone Masonry Compound and Workshop
• Proposal 9: Rebuilding of Boundary Wall
• Proposal 10: Re-surfaced Paths in Northern half of the Park
• Proposal 11: Addition of new Buildings at Main Entrance
• Proposal 12: Interpretation
• Phasing
• The Historical Overlays in draft 1
• The Ten Historical Landscape Phases
• The Nature & Landscape Zones in draft 1
• Bibliography
• Appendices

1. Introduction to draft 1

Context

1.1 This web page is written in the context of the Abney Park Trust's partnership with L.B.Hackney and consultation with the local community, preparatory to a Stage 1 HLF application in June-Sept. 2007.

1.2 They set out the Trust's approach to a 'Conservation Plan' comprising a series of preparatory studies co-financed by a HLF Project Planning Grant and other resources.

1.3 Here you will find a summary of the component studies (or study plans) that are being completed, timetables for these, and the Trust's approach to their content.

1.4 The 'Conservation Plan' includes studies of the historical qualities of the park's landscape, soem cgharacterists of which are of worldwide, european, national, and regional significance in London.

1.5 Taking an 'evidence-based approach' ecah study plan examines the park's historical and cultural qualities in the context of contemporary assessments of need. Based on this, a set of key issues is being developed, each of which is addressed by a numbered 'Proposal' or 'Proposals' which form the Trusts draft proposals which it invites comments upon before further development.

1.6 The eventual overall plan - a Conservation Plan - aims to improve the urban environment of the park as a whole, with mobility and livability in mind, improved educational facilities, and a high quality, welcoming, and inclusive, semi-natural environment.

The Study Plans*

1.7  Each 'Study Plan' follows a similar structure. The proposed study plans are:

• Conservation Management Plan
• Audience Development Plan
• Access Plan
• Training Plan
• Business Plan

1.8 The contents of each 'Study Plan' is as follows:

• S1. Introduction
• S2. Historical Analysis*
• S3. Contemporary Analysis*
• s4. Issues to be addressed**
• S5. Proposals of the Trust **
• S6. Bibliography
• S7. Appendices  

* = subdivided into a) Evidence Base and b) Discussion ;  ** = categorised by a standard, agreed, list of c.10-15 'Proposals' to which each plan should aim to contribute although for any one proposal there will be a 'lead plan'

1.9 Work on these 'Study Plans' is commencing in March 2006 and they not be available in completed form until September 2006; but their approach is summarised in these web pages to encourage feedback during preparation.

2. Main Issues in draft 1 

2.1 The main issues to be addressed by the Trust are summarised below, followed by the proposed scheme of works to the cemetery’s buildings, & landscape and associated service improvements such as training and educational programmes and site interpretation.

Conservation Management Plan

The main issues to be addressed in the proposed scheme are:

• Historically unique chapel at great risk (CMP1)

• Quality of main axial vista and walk in memory of Rev. Dr. Isaac Watts' lost from 1918 onwards due to infilling and obscuring (CMP2)

• Extent and quality of locally rare dry heath habitat at risk from invasive species (CMP3)

• Effective landscape management impeded by lack of delineation of ‘burial-free’ areas and informality of ‘discretionary burial’ approach (CMP4)

• Historically unique landscape and arboretum deserves celebration and strengthening (CMP5)

• Perimeter safety and security deteriorating (boundary wall/railings) (CMP6)

• Woodland nature reserve of metropolitan importance needs interventions to maintain habitat value and local distinctiveness, including its woodland herb layer (CMP7)

Audience Development Plan

The main issues to be addressed in the proposed scheme are:

• Risk of dereliction in very heart of park attracting crime and disaffecting use of whole park (ADP1)

• Lack of space for education, volunteers, exhibition/interpretation (ADP2)

• Poor environment at two entrances (ADP 3)

• No formal status or agreements since 1970s for those whose relatives are interred (ADP4)

• Monuments and social history record deteriorating and without registered keepers since the 1970s (ADP5)

• Inner City area with considerable educational/training need (ADP6) • No evening use of South Lodge unless whole cemetery opened and locked (ADP7)

• Loss of cemetery shop fronting onto High Street after 1970s (ADP8)

Access Plan

The main issues to be addressed in the proposed scheme are:

• No through access for disabled (AP1)

• Strategic ‘Capital Ring’ walking route needs interventions to ensure inclusive access and environmental design befitting its metropolitan status (AP2)

• Decaying or dangerous footings and headstones in publicly accessible areas (AP3)

• No disabled access of War Memorial (AP4)

• Need to devise a holistic parking & vehicular access scheme (no allocated disabled car parking, no secure or sheltered cycle parking, undefined parking controls, review of servicing needed, whether/where the park provides a Green Route for cycling undefined) (AP5)

• Use of dog-free and children zones needs consideration (AP7) • Quality and availability of local transport links, adequacy of travel information and progress towards a workplace travel plan need consideration (AP8) Business Plan/Training Plan

3. The Trust's Proposals in draft 1

3.1 Solutions that deal effectively with the above issues form the numbered ‘Proposals’ of the AbneyFutures plan. These are summarised below.

Proposal 1: Chapel & Chapel Lawns Restoration

Issues to be tackled:

¨ risk of dereliction in very heart of park attracting crime and disaffecting use of whole park (ADP1) &

¨ historically unique chapel at risk (CMP1)

¨Lack of space for education, volunteers, exhibition/interpretation (ADP2)

Discussion

The Trust’s priority is to return the very heart of the park to a publicly beneficial use and activity that would benefit the whole park(ADP1).

A landmark scheme is sought because the chapel is a singularly important building at risk in terms of the historical precedent it set to burial reform and how this was carefully interpreted in terms of architecture/design.

Complete restoration of the Abney Park Chapel to a fully working and usable building with external landscaping and lighting is planned. The restored chapel and lawns will be used to enhance interpretation of the sites and to hold a wide range of activities and events from exhibitions to music and theatre performance, social events, talks and education classes. It will be partially programmed by the Trust and partially available for hire by outside bodies and individuals. Bringing the chapel back into use is a central part of the business plan but to achieve this it must be designed with low running costs such as use of grey-water and incorporation of natural light into the roof design.

Proposal 2: Entrance-way Acquisition & Redecoration

Issues to be tackled:

¨Poor environment at two entrances (ADP 3)

Discussion

The local Conservation Area Appraisal (Nov 2004) identifies the views into the park at the two entranceways as of particular importance to the appearance of the Conservation Area. This proposal aims largely to address the visual quality of these entrance-ways by a package of historically accurate improvements. Church Street Entrance: The view at the Church Street entrance is proposed to be enhanced by restoration including replacement of concrete coping slabs on the wall with stone, removal of concrete rendering to expose the historic brickwork, replacement of a missing finial ball to a wall pier, and completion of Abney House Gate to the original design by addition of missing ironwork. In addition new interpretive signage is proposed here and repainting of the entrance railings.

A separate proposal (AP XX) introduces a new disabled access-way restoration of the former tradesman’s entrance,; and proposal CMPxxx aims to partially restore the original axiality by repositioning the main steps.

Main Entrance:

The view of the main entrance forecourt is proposed to be enhanced by restoration. The proposals recognise that the original symmetrical lodge design became amended once its open-countryside design context had gone and Victorian building lines had been established. These precluded a view into the park from northbound travellers; the principal view since has been from the north looking southwards towards the South Lodge. Appropriate to this urban design context, the South Lodge became used for ‘public’ uses (visitors, administration and shop facilities) and the North Lodge for grounds-keeping and site services.

As these lodges were extended, the North Lodge extensions, including additional buildings and greenhouses, remained hidden from the main view into the park and had no overall design theme, whereas those forming additions to the South Lodge were all built with a similar design, massing and height. One of the South lodge extensions – the cemetery shop- was sold when the company went into liquidation in the 1970s and the Trust proposes to re-acquire it for the original use to improve frontage management and appearance as an integral whole and improve safe access and encourage greater community involvement (at present evening access for meetings and community users of the office, necessitates unlocking the main gates which requires arrangements and puts staff and volunteers in a less than safe, unlit position). The addition of the shop is therefore also important to the Access and Audience Development Plan. In addition it is clearly importance to the Business Plan.

Taking the former shop back into the curtilage of the park and restoring the building to its original use, will enable the Trust to manage the entire South lodge as a whole.

This assists its proposal to improve views into the park by tackling the principal disfiguring element - the graffiti and barbed wire and commercial block that rise above the historic South Lodge from its roofline. This is the major discordant element in the important view. It is essential that the park looks attractive at this entrance-way.

The proposal seeks to replace the barbed wire and take control of the roofline of the private ly owned shop marred by graffiti, and design a model green roof using a plant screen. This draws on the historical images of the Lodge as covered in ivy, and reflects regional planning advice that encourages green roofs. These works require acquisition of the lost cemetery shop for completeness, otherwise the Trust would have no control over the appearance of the most prominent part of the entranceway.

The Trust proposes to render the shop identically in appearance to the other South Lodge extension and may replace the original small planted garden on the courtyard infront of it. Because the frontage appearance is so dependant on completing the acquisition, but this is uncertain, further studies will be needed to underpin negotiation but acquisition would most sensible for phase 1 since phase 2 involves the specification of new buildings to add to those that already exist at the entrance-way. In addition, new interpretive signage is proposed here and the following works: repainting of the entrance railings, rising bollards, addition of flagstones to grantite sett path for ease of disabled ridership.

Proposal 3: Neglected Monument Scheme

Issues to be tackled:

No formal status for those whose relatives are interred (ADP4)

Decaying or dangerous footings and headstones in publicly accessible areas (AP5)

Poorly defined ‘courtesy burial’ and ‘burial-free’ areas gives risks poor landscape management (CMP6)

Discussion

Monument Registration Scheme:

The former cemetery company drew up agreements in each and every case where a person wished to manage or build or repair or modify a monument.

The agreements permitted the erection of memorials subject to the company putting the interests of estate management first, thereby reserving the right to remove or amend due to neglect or damage, danger or other management considerations. It is important to re-establish this both to the benefit of relatives or those interested in adopting monuments for historical reasons, and to ensure the Trust and Council explain their estate management powers and duties. This is a matter for the lease, which it is proposed would also include reference to the Trust and Council’s scheme of registration and a map showing non-burial areas.

The proposal also includes the development of an AbneyLinks website to maintain proper records and pictures of the monuments and those who have a permitted interest in them. This project necessitates a full topographical survey and subsequent work to develop a database for monuments and registrations.

Decayed Monument Survey:

The proposal also necessitates a survey of decayed monuments that may be repositioned by laying headstones flat or relocating them to the boundary walls as is commonplace in Churchyard restoration schemes.

This proposal is for phase 1.

Proposal 4: Replanting of Arboretum

Issues to be tackled:

¨Historically unique landscape and arboretum at risk (CMP5)

Discussion

The park once contained the largest educational arboretum in the UK; with 2,500 trees and shrubs all named. This was the first European garden cemetery to include an arboretum and took the concept from ‘New World’ garden cemetery designs.

It is regarded as essential to any historical restoration to re-create an arboretum. Its layout was unique, being arranged A to Z around the perimeter of the park. The Trust and Council propose the north of the park to be prioritised for lower visitor activity and native trees to respect the status of the park as a statutory Local Nature Reserve; ornamental trees would be inappropriate in the perimeter of that part of the park. The proposal therefore seeks to re-establish the A to Z arboretum along the Southern Boundary Path between the main entrance (e.g. Shirley Hibberd’s grave) and Church Street; or, possibly for the whole length of the Southern Boundary path south of the chapel.

The proposal would entail replanting only on the side of the path between the path and the boundary wall in keeping with the original scheme. Additional groves of trees were added to this intriguing A to Z boundary collection whilst the park was maintained by the Joint Stock company (1838-1881) and these additional collections were planted alongside the paths.

The proposal therefore aims to restore the conifer collection alongside the Church walk between the main entrance and the Chapel. When the park cemetery was opened it also inherited a good number of trees from the former estate and was noted as having already ‘well timbered grounds’. To reflect this aspect of the historical planting scheme, the proposal seeks to develop a scheme to replant the Cedar Circle with a Cedar of Lebanon tree, and to commission a study of how best to approach the elm avenues in the north given their setting in future in a Local Nature Reserve suited to native trees.

These proposals would be for phase 1; further design work is required.

Proposal 5: Re-surfaced Paths in Southern half of the Park

Issues to be tackled:

¨Poor walking conditions for strategic ‘Capital Ring’ (AP2)

Discussion

This proposal aims to resurface the paths and carriage-ways in the southern half of the park that connect the two entrances and the chapel, and have potential to attract increased use as part of the Capital Ring.

The Chapel Walk from the re-laid main entrance to Abney Park Chapel will need to have a surface suitable for use on a more than occasional basis by motor vehicles servicing the chapel, taking film crews there, etc. This is proposed for completion at the end of Phase 1 once contractors vehicles have left and the chapel is completed. There are one or two other carriage-ways that are proposed to be designed with vehiclular use in mind – the New Road (optional) and the South Boundary Road.

Unlike the Chapel Walk, these are proposed for more occasional vehiclular use and decisions on the status of one remain to be finalised. There are a myriad of other small paths in the southern zone, for pedestrians only, and these are proposed to be resurfaced. A detailed study of appropriate path materials will help inform the Trust and Council about choice of materials.

Selected surfacing materials will reflect the hierarchy of use and be context-sensitive; a range of materials is therefore likely to be used in different situations.

Proposal 6: Restoration of Axial Vista and Birch Heath

Issues to be tackled:

¨In-filling of main axial vista post WW1 (CMP2)

¨ Habitat value at risk from invasive species (CMP3)

Discussion

The Trust’s second priority is to reverse the commercially motivated in-filing of the main axial vista from 1918 onwards. This axis is central to the religious, educational and historical motivation that lay behind the scheme for land assesmbly and re-establishment of Abney Park in 1838-43.

The main axis aligns the top of the old carriage-way gate of Abney House (where Dr Watts lived and wrote his verses and educational books), with the public subscription statue in memory of Dr Watts, the Cross of Sacrifice of the WW1 War Grave Memorial, the crest of the oogee arch and centre of the botanical rose window inbetween the dramatic turreted frontage of the south façade of the Abney Park Chapel, and - positioned at the very heart of the park – the Bloxham-style octagonal steeple.

A scheme to restore the full visual potential of this axis as both the key landscape vista and also as a pleasant and quiet off-road walk through a semi-natural environment, is sought. This would be a sensitive and careful interpretation of architecture/design and ecology. Birch Heath Woodland: In terms of the latter, this part of the park is the sole remaining area of ‘sandy brickearth soils’ in Hackney and Stoke Newington, a district where this drift geology was once more widespread.

The resultant dry heath flora, now unique in Hackney, is evident by the natural colonisation of silver birch trees and areas of bracken heath. Though the original heathy woodland was cleared prior to establishment of Abney Park, the word ‘stoke’ derives from ‘stock, Anglo-saxon for ‘wood’ since Stoke Newington was well wooded until the middle ages.

This proposal will involve clearance of invasive sycamore, ash and ivy and an ecological replanting scheme, celebrating the dry heath grassland of Abney Park that followed woodland clearance, and its natural re-colonisation by silver birch trees, to add to the park’s sylvan character and produce a rich tree-heath mosaic with high educational and ecological value.

The full extent of the proposal is yet to be detailed. It is possible that the central part of the birch wood/heathy ground flora area would be established in phase 1, and extended or enlarged in phase 2.

Improvements to War Memorial:

This proposal also incorporate improvement to the raised platform built over the former catacombs in about 1920. This enabled the positioning of a Cross of Sacrifice, to Sir Reginald Blomfields standard design, in an elevated position from where visitors could overlook the chapel lawns. Regretably the otherwise splendid commemorative scheme was designed to dovetail with the cemetery company’s plan to remodel Abney House corner and Dr Watts’ Walk by removal of this important axial vista to create additional saleable burial space and to secure this commercial objective, the design precludes visitors from accessing the platform and Cross of Sacrifice from Dr Watts’ Walts, and worse, precludes visual appreciation of the Cross of Sacrifice from this direction.

The blocking of southerly access to the memorial and blocking the view of its cross, enabled the then ‘hidden’ Dr Watts Walk to be in-filled and no longer connect to the Chapel Lawns.

This proposal seeks to remedy this by removal of the southern blocking wall and repositioning this on the eastern side where the names it carries would also be better illuminated (they are currently on a cold, dark north-facing wall). The scheme would permit the southern wall to become either a symmetrical arrangement of steps, improving appreciation and access to the monument, or to become a disabled access ramp.

The Access Plan identifies the monument as the second of only two places inaccessible to the disabled in the park. Improvements at Abney House Corner/Church Street Entrance: The filling-in of the axial walk, beginning in about 1918, extended to the Church Street gates. The original Abney House carriage-drive that had been at the same level as Church Street was in-filled by raising it to the level of the adjacent planted beds.

The original gate to Abney House was removed and re-hinged on new brick pillars, leading to a 90-degree new stepped access path up and onto the raised in-filled carriage drive. The brick pillars were replaced by something approaching the original ironwork in 1980 as an early improvement carried out by Hackney Council on acquiring ownership. At the same time the original gates to Abney House were extensively repaired.

However the basic layout of the 90-degre stepped access was left unaltered. This proposal aims to reposition the steps so as to further bring the entrance back closer to its original arrangement. Whilst no steps were in the original scheme, this would have the merit of aligning the steps to the original axial walk and view. This proposal would necessitate removal of two headstones and their kerbing from the 1950s and repositioning the memorial on the wall or ground nearby as is commonplace in churchyard restoration schemes.

In its more complete form this proposal could be developed to establish a new path from the steps on the original axial walk alignment. This would entail further monument repositioning, either of the smaller 1950s monuments and kerbstones or of these together with two or three of the row of tall ornamented Edwardian monuments.

Proposal 7: New Disabled Access, Church Street

Issues to be tackled:

¨No through access for disabled (AP1)

Discussion

A key responsibility of the Access Plan is to carry out an access audit. This must bear in mind that new responsibilities arise from the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) and the needs of an ageing population and increasing longevity.

Whilst the park can be accessed via the front entrance by users with mobility vehicles and chairs, and by others with special access needs, the park can not be used by these visitors as a through route. Establishment of the park as a key section of the new strategic walking route ‘Capital Ring’, further motivates the Trust and Council to see fully inclusive provision for through-access and may provide a source of match funding.

The proposal seeks to open up the original tradesmans’ entrance and pathway that led to the outbuildings/farm at the rear of Abney House. This was used as the cemetery’s entrance whilst Abney House was used as a college, and for many years after its demolition, eventually being bricked up when the Church Street frontage was comprehensively redesigned and downgraded for additional burial space in about 1918. All large houses would normally have had a secondary entrance, and this access proposal would reinstate this, adding heritage value.

The detailed design and issues that may arise, such as removal or repositioning of memorial tablets to boundary walls or for laying flat, is yet to be detailed. It is possible that phase 1 would include completion of the access entrance and a temporary path; the fully developed alignment and permanent materials being included in phase 2.

Proposal 8: Stone Masonry Compound and Workshop

Issues to be tackled:

¨Monuments and social history record deteriorating (ADP4)

Discussion

The park contains many monuments of historical interest and social significance, but these are generally in a poor state of repair. This proposal aims to develop a stone masonry compound and workshop, primarily bringing back into use the former estate yard in the SE corner of the park off the South Boundary Road.

To complement this the proposal involves the identification of a programme of works to monuments and their photographing and recording as part of the AbneyLinks proposal. This proposal is for both Phase 1 and 2 due to the potentially vast extent of the works.

Proposal 9: Rebuilding of Boundary Wall

Issues to be tackled:

¨ Perimeter safety and security (boundary wall) deteriorating (CMP6)

Discussion

This proposal seeks to rebuild the perimeter wall. This is included in both phases 1 and 2 due to the potentially large scale of the works.

Proposal 10: Re-surfaced Paths in Northern half of the Park

Issues to be tackled:

¨Poor walking conditions for strategic ‘Capital Ring’ (AP2)

Discussion

This proposal seeks to extend good standards of path surfacing for those who use of the park, beyond that which is integral to the ‘Capital Ring’ and the higher-volume access areas of the south. It aims to improve the condition of the paths in the northern woodland area which is proposed as a local nature reserve area.

Due to the valued ecology, path edges in this area more sensitive to disturbance in the re-building of paths. Moreover, the nature of the surface materials needs to be carefully considered to best reflect the ‘countryside’ character of this part of the park.

Proposal 11: Addition of new Buildings at Main Entrance

Issues to be tackled:

¨Lack of space for education, volunteers, exhibition/interpretation (ADP2) ¨Poor environment at two entrances (ADP 3)

Discussion

This proposal builds on proposals concerned with the visual appreciation and integrity of the main entrance frontage of phase 1 (proposal XXX) by setting out proposals for the planned refurbishment of all existing main frontage buildings and open spaces and identification of additional buildings integral to a wholly new frontage space.

The proposal... (error!! ) missing !!!

associated open spaces, sufficient to ensure efficient use of the main frontage area. In particular this proposal aims to build a permanent educational facility.

Proposal 12: Interpretation Issues to be tackled:

Issues to be Tackled:

¨Lack of space for education, volunteers, exhibition/interpretation (ADP2)

Discussion

AbneyLinks: This proposal recognises that, besides the use of physical space, e-space can be used to overcome the lack of space for education, volunteers ,and in particular to overcome a lack of space for exhibition/interpretation.

To develop e-space the proposal is centred on the need for a good quality topographical survey and database. This should incorporate monument and tree survey data and photographs.

This proposal has a wide audience development value, enabling the Trust and Council to respond to the Conservation Area Appraisal’s recommendation for a full tree survey, and to provide a links site for exhibiting research by Friends and volunteers and schoolwork. The AbneyLinks website is also planned to provide for e-commerce, and is an important part of the Business Plan.

Publications Scheme:

Traditional methods of communication (a publications scheme) are also proposed. Whilst the Trust had a ‘heavyweight’ site guide and leaflets and maps, it lacks intermediate level publications.

This proposal seeks to remedy this by developing a series of brief topic-based guides. These proposals support and dovetail to those already included for new interpretation boards at both entrances as part of entrance improvement schemes (XXX YYYY).

4. Phasing

It is proposed that these be addressed in the following phased way: Phase 1 only Phase 1/2 Phase 2 only

5. The Historical Overlays in draft 1

5.1 All of the plans (CMP, AP, ADP etc) depend upon an understanding of landscape evolution over a long period of time. These plans will therefore need to be evidence-based, using maps engravings and photographs wherever possible. In all cases, such illustrations must clearly state by annotation or detailed captioning, precisely what they are intended to show.

5.2 Illustrations that are included purely as visual breaks should be limited in number, though where considered useful for design and visualisation purposes they should be clearly identified as for this purpose by using an appropriate ‘homely strapline’ caption. 4.3 Illustrations used for the reasoned justifications and historical analysis of the plans, and accompanying text, should be consistent with regard to the overlay periods. These should be as follows:

The Ten Historical Landscape Phases

It is a convention in European landscape analysis to view landscape as having changed through various historical periods. This is a reflection of the strong influence of human activity on the landscape over thousands of years; in contrast to the way the way New World landscapes had to be studied in the early nineteenth century by Emmerson.

As can be seen below, the historical overlay periods for Abney Park become shorter the closer we approach the modern day. This is both a reflection of the greater influence of recent human activity on the landscape, and also its increasing documentation.

Phase 1 Neolithic - stone age axe-making site

Phase 2 Roman, Mediaeval and early Manorial period

- woodland with wild boar and wolves, gradually becoming well-timbered pasture land

Phase 3 The Abney & Fleetwood Park Estates: c.1690- 1838, building of Abney House and laying out of its park associated with Life of Dr Isaac Watts and Lady Mary Abney; Fleetwood House and gardens laid out in part of the grounds, becoming Newington Academy for Girls

Phase 4 Design and opening of the first Nondenominational Garden Cemetery in Europe, preserving the Historic Park & adding an educational Arboretum and Methodist training college: 1838-1845 (primarily 1838-40)

Phase 5 Multi-purpose management as a Cemetery, Historic Park & Arboretum - by Trustees and Directors of a Joint Stock Company established solely for Abney Park: 1845-81

Phase 6 Commercial Cemetery Management - by a stock market registered general cemetery company (maintaining four cemeteries) and landscape to suit: 1881-1918

Phase 7 Inter-war Infilling degradation of landscape, main axis, and estate paths: 1918-1945

Phase 8 Neglect, Liquidation & Closure - post-war infilling of paths and open areas, eventual neglect, liquidation and closure as a working cemetery: 1945-1979

Phase 9 Management of Historic Estate by Hackney Council - early management of the historic estate by Hackney Council for community access, monument repair and study, and formation of landscape plans, with only courtesy burials: 1979-91

Phase 10 Abney Park Trust established to secure long-term access, community and educational/training use, restore buildings and historic and ecological value: 1991-

Each of these historical overlay periods is being assessed by the Trust for the ten landscape zones of Abney Park (see 'Nature' or 'Nature and Landscape' pages), and when complete will underpin our future proposals. The Trust's website will then be updated to precisely reflect the historical periods for each landscape zone. Meanwhile a more discursive 'general history' is provided below.

The Nature & Landscape Zones 

Introduction

Abney Park contains ten nature and landscape zones that form the basis for the Trust's studies of 'historical layers' i.e. how nature and landscape have changed through the ages (see 'History' pages for the 'layers' or time periods the Trust uses).

The ten nature and landscape zones (nature and landscape zones) are arranged into three broad divisions of Abney Park, the Egyptian Revival' entrance, the Capital Ring Walks, and the Wildwood and Woodland Walks:

1. THE 'EGYPTIAL REVIVAL' ENTRANCE

2. THE CAPITAL RING WALKS

2a. The Chapel Walk

2b. The Chapel Lawns & Chapel

2c. The Birch Heath

2d. Dr Watts' Vista (axial vista from Dr Watts' Walk to Church Street)

2e. Loddiges Gardens & Courtyard

2f. The Cedar Circle & Fleetwood Gardens

2g. The Arboretum and Abney Orchard

3. THE WILDWOOD WOODLAND WALKS

3a. The Elm Avenues

3b. Dr Watts' Mound

Information about each of these zones will gradually be added to this page or become available in the 'Conservation Plan' and its study plans (primarily its 'Conservation Management Plan', 'Access Plan', and Audience Development Plan'). 

6. Bibliography

7. Appendices

Feedback

If you would like to comment on anything in these draft plans, please send an e-mail to abneylinks@mac.com

N.B. You may still comment on draft 1. However, following comments received already, the fully illustrated draft 2 will shortly be available for consultation, along with individual 'Project Proposal Briefs'. When approvbed by the Board for round 2 consultation, these will be uploaded here in early 2007.

Discuss