‘Hyde Park sized’ Beddington reserve branded 'disappointment’ 

The ‘Hyde Park sized’ conservation area, which was planned to act as a haven for at-risk wildlife, has been subject to much controversy over its nearly 20-year lifespan. 

The 120-hectare site was initially proposed as South London’s newest wetland habitat nearly 20 years ago and would provide ample space for wildlife and humans.

The Beddington Farmlands was first promised nearly 20 years ago as a new nature reserve for South London's endangered species (Credit: Peter Alfrey)

However, campaigners believe plans for farmlands have been ‘watered down’ to the point that they will no longer be fit for purpose. 

The plans, validated by Sutton Council on February 22, have come in response to the public consultation over Christmas.

During the consultation, Lysanne Horrox, Chair of the Hackbridge and Beddington Corner Neighbourhood Development Group said: “The current plan for the restoration of Beddington Farmlands has failed to meet its objectives.

In response to the plans the Wandle Valley Forum (WVF), a volunteer-run conservation group, has published a list outlining what they argue to be the current site’s ‘major shortcomings’.

Speaking to the LDRS, Tony Burton, Chair of the WVF, said: “The revised plans for Beddington Farmlands are a huge disappointment. All the evidence shows they are not as good for either wildlife or public access as the original plans.”

He added: “Local communities have been waiting in vain for years to enjoy the long-promised nature reserve only to have their hopes dashed by the new owners.

"Sutton Council now needs to stand firm and demand a much more ambitious approach that benefits wildlife, provides better public access, and connects the whole area of open land between Mitcham Common and Beddington Park on both sides of the railway.”

A key bone of contention that campaigners have is Valencia Waste Management’s decision to abandon plans to create an acid grassland site.

Acid grassland provides a rich breeding ground for at-risk species, including bees and Skylarks.

Despite this type of grassland initially being promised, Valencia has since reneged on the pledge citing cost and environmental concerns.

Valencia has now opted to implement wet grassland on site, which the WVF believes will reduce the biodiversity benefits.

However, the WVF believes the money Valencia have saved from opting against acid grassland has not been effectively reinvested in new habitats and better visitor facilities.

In their list of objections, the WVF said: “We recognise the reasons for not progressing with the plans for acid grassland and heath.

"The alternative proposals are both less expensive to deliver and result in poorer biodiversity outcomes. 

“It is essential therefore to not only enhance the plans to provide a net ecological gain over the original plans but also to mitigate the loss of acid grassland and heath.”

Biodiversity net gain was a particular focus for campaigners, who see the site’s development as an essential measure to safeguard endangered wildlife in the largely industrial area.

Yet according to campaigners, delays and mismanagement have already led to the disappearance of species like tree sparrow, redshank, and yellow wagtail, which were all targets for protection in the proposals.

Local bird expert Peter Alfrey told the LDRS how this development is emblematic of several changes that have taken place during recent years.

Mr Alfrey, who has followed and campaigned on the project since its inception in 1996, told the LDRS earlier this year: “Our primary concern is that we have seen this process so many times in the past.”

He added: “We went through all this five years ago. All of the habitats are supposed to be in place by December 31, 2023, but what’s happening here is that the can has been kicked down the road, and we are just starting again.”

While Valencia has been clear that the site would not be fully open for public access at last year’s end, campaigners are worried that they have lagged behind in creating the important wildlife habitats.

According to WVF, enforcement measures have now begun to address Valencia’s failure to deliver this before the deadline. 

Public access to the site was another key issue that has attracted much concern.

While all agree that nature is the key consideration for the site, campaigners have stressed that access to the site is currently limited for nearby residents.

Specifically, Valencia’s proposals fail to provide the key Mile Road east/west route in the current planning agreement.

According to the WVF, the ideal route would be to use the remaining railway bridge that would link residents of Hackbridge to the site.

However, they believe the alternate route provided is inconvenient and could place pedestrians and cyclists in danger of HGVs coming from the nearby incinerator site.

The WVF has also accused Valencia of failing to restore the lost bridge over the railway that links to Hackbridge Primary School, however, Valencia has said this falls under Network Rail’s remit.

The WVF said: “We are profoundly disappointed by the lack of ambition for providing public access to and through the site. Public access agreed a decade ago has still not been provided and the plans envisage further long delays.”

The WVF also took issue with Valencia’s plans to close the site to the public at 2:30 pm, saying that this further limited public access to the farmlands.

However, Valencia responded by saying ‘all parks have closing times,’ and emphasised that biodiversity was the key concern for them.

Campaigners also view the lack of detail regarding plans to eventually run the site by the London Wetland Centre as another example of Valencia’s lack of ambition for the site.

While Valencia acknowledged they had worked closely with the conservation charity throughout the process, they insisted there was no obligation to hand over the site to them.

A number of local politicians have criticised what they see as Sutton Council’s inability to hold Valencia, and previous site owners Virirdor, to account for the lack of progress.

Criticism has come from across the political divide, but Beddington’s independent councillors have been the most vocal throughout.

Beddington Councillor Nick Mattey told the LDRS: “Nothing has been done to make this into the country park promised by Viridor and Sutton Council. Instead the land is now the responsibility of Valencia. 

“They too have done nothing to make this into an accessible country park. Sutton Council should have carried out enforcement but done nothing.”

When approached for comment, a spokesperson for Sutton Council said: “The Council remains committed to delivering Beddington Farmlands. It is a vital scheme that will bring new habitats to Sutton, as well as bringing many benefits to local residents. 

“Valencia Waste Management is responsible for delivering the restoration scheme and we continue to monitor very closely any proposed changes to the scheme and timetable for its completion.”

A spokesperson for Valencia said: “We are committed to restoring the Beddington Farmlands into a network of habitats in line with the planning requirements.

"Once restored the Farmlands will transform a former landfill site into fantastic asset for wildlife, and the local community. The project is vast in scale, and complex requiring significant investment, and detailed management to establish the habitats.

"Significant progress is being made onsite with new bird hides and footpath network being installed towards the end of 2023.

“Following extensive consultation with stakeholders, Valencia has undertaken technical assessments to present proposals to vary the restoration plans to ensure they are deliverable, sustainable, and viable. The proposals are in line with the requirements, and the local planning authority has been kept updated throughout this period.”