Help save Beckenham Place Park golf course

[jpjeffery]

Some of you may remember this thread: http://forums.golf-monthly.co.uk/showthread.php?68785-Beckenham-Place-Park-in-danger-of-closure

Anyway, here goes, Lewisham Council wants to close the golf course in Beckenham Place Park, citing lack of use.

However they're ignoring inconvenient details such as other park users (i.e. non-golfers) like the presence of golfers as it makes them feel safe (because rather than an otherwise 'deserted' space, where a walker might wonder about the motives of someone else in the park, there is a steady stream of golf players who know what they're doing and so effectively exert some authority of safety), and that the lack of attendance figures cited by Lewisham are actually wholly inaccurate.

So please, show your support for the fight against this shallow, box-ticking exercise, and sign the e-petition and pass it on to anyone you know who likes golf (or even anyone who doesn't)

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/70912

Thank you in advance, and happy new year.

 

[NST]

Signed.

 

[jpjeffery]

Signed.

Good man!
:whoo::thup::cheers:

 

[SammmeBee]

Way too many golf courses round that way.....all the others would benefit from it closing. Life goes on.....

 

[LUFC 1972]

Played there a few times as relatives nearby, so would be a shame if it was too close, would miss the parrot things that fly about and it is a nice course for a quick round.

So have signed the petition.

Don't know what other courses are around that area, I stay in Herne Hill and have played Dulwich which is nothing special and Aquarius which is IMO the worst course I have played on...so would be a shame if Beckenham closed.

 

[jpjeffery]

Way too many golf courses round that way...

I'm not sure how you measure "Way too many" or even "round that way", but of the nearby public - by which I mean not restricted in any way to paid-up club members - courses (of which Beckenham Place Park is one) High Elms is 6 miles away, Addington Court is 7 miles, and Bromley Golf Course (which is a nine-hole course) is 5 miles.

We also believe that Beckenham Place Park is the last 18-hole public golf course in the inner London boroughs.

So, yes there are other courses which aren't very far away for adults with cars, but closing this one would rob local kids of a place to play that's easy to get to, thus further reducing the numbers of golfers in the medium and long term. All this when there are concerns over childhood (and adulthood) obesity, and with golf as an Olympic sport on the horizon.

But one of our (and by "our", I mean the members of Braeside Golf Club, for whom the course is our home) biggest issues is the lack of appropriate consultation being made by the council. They say they've consulted fully with all interested parties, but they didn't consult with us, and I understand there's evidence to suggest that they've ignored significant aspects of the results they did get. Specifically that respondents have said that they DON'T want the golf course to go.

In short, Lewisham council seem to be trying to do what they want to do do, whether the GBP like it or not, and they've tried very hard to create the conditions to justify their actions by failing to maintain or publicize the course, thus slowly reducing the attendance figures, albeit not by nearly as much as they've falsely claimed, and by closing down the once thriving youth academy that used to be sited there.

So, it is, of course, up to you whether to sign the petition or not, but I thought I'd give a little further back story.

 

[jpjeffery]

Here's a picture showing Beckenham Place Park (marked as A) in the middle of a little otherwise public-golfless desert of despair.

A= Beckenham Place Park
C and F are two of the Addington venues (only one of which is 'public')
D = Shirley Park (not public!)
E = Dulwich (not public!)
G = Bromley Golf Course

 

[Fish]

I'm not sure how you measure "Way too many" or even "round that way", but of the nearby public - by which I mean not restricted in any way to paid-up club members - courses (of which Beckenham Place Park is one) High Elms is 6 miles away, Addington Court is 7 miles, and Bromley Golf Course (which is a nine-hole course) is 5 miles.

We also believe that Beckenham Place Park is the last 18-hole public golf course in the inner London boroughs.

So, yes there are other courses which aren't very far away for adults with cars, but closing this one would rob local kids of a place to play that's easy to get to, thus further reducing the numbers of golfers in the medium and long term. All this when there are concerns over childhood (and adulthood) obesity, and with golf as an Olympic sport on the horizon.

But one of our (and by "our", I mean the members of Braeside Golf Club, for whom the course is our home) biggest issues is the lack of appropriate consultation being made by the council. They say they've consulted fully with all interested parties, but they didn't consult with us, and I understand there's evidence to suggest that they've ignored significant aspects of the results they did get. Specifically that respondents have said that they DON'T want the golf course to go.

In short, Lewisham council seem to be trying to do what they want to do do, whether the GBP like it or not, and they've tried very hard to create the conditions to justify their actions by failing to maintain or publicize the course, thus slowly reducing the attendance figures, albeit not by nearly as much as they've falsely claimed, and by closing down the once thriving youth academy that used to be sited there.

So, it is, of course, up to you whether to sign the petition or not, but I thought I'd give a little further back story.

This is all well and good in general, but where are your facts & figures to substantiate your views, opinions & observations? How many kids/juniors play at Beckenham in contrast to the figures put forward by the council, what is your assessment of how many golfers overall play p/day as a true average?

This is coming across as a bit of a personal crusade rather than a practical objection to something that is in your opinion being used to its fullest and is a worthy addition to the community but being closed down, you need to present your facts & figures by comparison not what you believe or think the course should be doing and what the community is losing out on in an ideal scenario or what it as done in past but for various reasons, is no longer doing so! The council is and has obviously looked well into it and if its not cost effective any more, then its dead, no more, not viable!

I'm not sure how long you've had the petition going, but with only 244 signatures on it and asking for more from forum members to which some will no doubt sign it for the wrong reasons, it would seem that your local support is somewhat on the thin side, no doubt hence the decision by the council!

 

[Oddsocks]

Way too many golf courses round that way.....all the others would benefit from it closing. Life goes on.....

Got to say I agree with this, it's been on a steady decline for years..... And feel others that are stronger would gain if it was to go....

Regarding other courses in the area

Members that allow pay and play

Farleigh court
Woldingham
Park wood
Lulling stone
Cherry lodge
Godstone

Full on pay and play

High elms (2 courses)
Addington court (3 courses)
Cray valley (2 courses)
Ruxley corner (1 course)
Pedham place
Chelsfield lakes
Bromley 9 hole

All of these are within 20-30 mins drive max, with some only 10-15 mins away.

 

[Mattyboy]

Signed - I used to enjoy the junior open there in the early 80's..........With my dyed blonde fringe and 'Frankie Says' cap...............:lol:

 

[jpjeffery]

Lots of things from Fish and Oddsocks, to respond to, excuse me if I don't quote directly.

I'm not a committee member in my club, so I've not personally seen any figures since Lewisham council brought up a figure of an average of 45 players a day. Even Lewisham council have since admitted this figure was wrong (they were only counting swipes of the pre-paid cards and not pay-and-play rounds which I suspect outnumber the former).

Personal crusade? Well, it is certainly something I feel personally yes. It's my local course, I can get there my public transport (tram then a 10 minute stroll, or a couple of buses if I don't have my trolley), and it's the home course of my club. When anyone's course is under threat of closure I'm pretty sure they would publicise said threat and try to garner support like I am. And I've not started this thread because I'm the only one who feels this way, but because this is how everyone in my club feels about it, though as I've at least implied in my paragraph above, I don't officially represent the club...but then I really don't think I need to be an official to publicise something my club is doing!

The petition itself hasn't been running very long, which goes at least some way to explain the current figure of 268 signatures. I didn't start the petition, I'm just trying to up its profile. That's not a bad thing to do, is it?

The course is certainly run down. And if it was run down because fewer people played then anyone in charge would be right to consider closure, but I think it's the other way around (and I know many of my club-mates feel the same), i.e. it has been allowed to become run down (weeds allowed to grow in bunkers, greens not properly maintained, not-fit-for-purpose winter tee mats) in order to decrease its popularity and thereby justify its closure. I can't prove that. It's conjecture, I know, but we are talking about a place that used to be in the Guinness book of records as the busiest course in Europe, and GM Forum members have written that they have experienced for themselves a long queue of people waiting to tee off.

Anyhoo, I'll see if I can get a committee member to join in with some figures.

 

[Oddsocks]

Don't get me wrong losing any course Is a shame, as a kid I can remember queuing for hours to get an afternoon slot, but that was as I say when the course was in half decent nick. Hopefully it stays for the locals, but foot traffic will be what saves it and not signatures

 

[Bunkermagnet]

Fighting to save ones own golf course is laudible, however using across country people to sign a local petition will only make a situation worse if they did decide to save it on the amount of signatures, only to find still not enough people playing to justify it's keeping.
Sadly these are hard times, so if this course does go (just as Austin Lodge did a couple of months back) it won't be the last.

 

[Oddsocks]

And Austin was a lot better course!

 

[Fish]

Don't get me wrong losing any course Is a shame, as a kid I can remember queuing for hours to get an afternoon slot, but that was as I say when the course was in half decent nick. Hopefully it stays for the locals, but foot traffic will be what saves it and not signatures

I agree, losing any course is a shame, just like any business closing, but if its a vibrant course and well supported by the local community, then it shouldn't need the visibility of a national forum and people signatures who are signing out of past sentiment and not a loss to themselves in the present time, it only requires all the positive factual numbers and arguments presented if indeed they all fall in your favour!

It doesn't need a committee member to produce those figures, you are bringing the awareness to here and as such you should have all those to numbers to hand that clearly show and substantiate what you are presenting to us that the councils figures are totally incorrect. If the numbers from members and pay & play were good enough and bringing in a revenue stream to maintain the course, then that is where your argument truly lies, if the numbers were falling year-on-year then of course the course will suffer, any course would, so without hard fact numbers and not sentiment and conjecture, the argument is wasted on me, but I wish you luck with it.

 

[C&R]

Signed

 

[jpjeffery]

One of my/our major concerns is centred around the perceived vibrancy of the course (as in Lewisham Council's perception).

As I mentioned, they were justifying the course closure based on the figure of 45 golfers a day. If that figure was accurate then I suspect almost any course would find survival impossible and it would be very difficult to justify any argument against its closure.

However, that figure isn't accurate, and Lewisham have admitted so, but they appear to be at the stage of wanting to close the course no matter how popular or busy it is. The only time I've ever seen the course quiet is during bad weather, the rest of the time, including midweek and at any month of the year, there has always been a steady stream of players out there, and in the high season it is rare that one can get straight on the 1st tee without having to wait. So it does feel like their justification for the course closure is based on false/inaccurate data.

But then, the essence of the petition is to "...Guarantee that Lewisham Borough hold consultations with all Park and Course users and also all Local Residents as the said park is predominately bounded by residents of the Borough of Bromley...". That in itself may not change anything, indeed it may even help Lewisham Council in their aims!

My personal (and pessimistic) view is that as Lewisham 'own' the course they will do whatever they like with it. i.e. they don't have the political will to keep it open. Actually I would go a step further and say that the biggest factor is not the lack of political will to keep it open, but the presence of political will to close the course. It's the old "It's my ball!" story.

And so, if they want to close the course, I fear that ultimately they will. Personally, I just want to make sure they do it properly/honestly, rather than what seems to be more of a "We're in charge, we'll do whatever we want..." approach, because honestly, (and yes, I acknowledge this is an emotional reaction!) it just feels to me like they don't like golf.

 

[sawtooth]

Signed, and good luck.

I dont get why fellow golf-loving forum members question the motives of someone trying to save his/her golf course. Just sign it or ignore it and consider yourselves lucky that its not your course. It could be next time

 

[C&R]

Signed, and good luck.

I dont get why fellow golf-loving forum members question the motives of someone trying to save his/her golf course. Just sign it or ignore it and consider yourselves lucky that its not your course. It could be next time

Well said

 

[patricks148]

I remember going there with my Uncle in 1980, we queued up for over an hour and gave up in the end, it wasn't until 2006 i finally got a game of golf.

Gets me wondering what level i could have got to had i played that day 26 years earlier