Insuflo

They posted on Twitter (@lb_southwark) yesterday morning to say that they were closed because they had no water. Thames Water has got the road up right opposite. I can’t find any updates, sorry.

Looks like there’s going to be a park lake bridge going spare soon. Dulwich should get first dibs on it; it’s what she would’ve wanted. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy8g98zxgg6o 

38 minutes ago, Kathleen Olander said:

 I was surprised it was allowed on a listed building 

It’s not a listed building, is it? I can’t find any record of it being listed.

3 hours ago, malumbu said:

Well you will be fine as that was only on the re-released longer album.  

I beg to differ; it was on the original pressing.

I’m not getting into this. I don’t want to be Shot by Both Sides.

It does seem a common business strategy these days. River Island has just announced a similar restructuring: closing 33 shops and demanding that the landlords of a further 71 locations take a haircut. 

If you owe the bank £100, you’ve got a problem.

If you owe the bank £100 million, then the bank’s got a problem.

It’s the same principle.

It’s being reported that Poundland has written to all its landlords stating that they will stop paying rent until all leases can be renegotiated at a lower rate. 

45 minutes ago, LurkyMcLurker said:

What's probably happened here is an assignment of Poundland's lease.

That all makes sense, actually.

16 hours ago, researcher said:

I think that presumption's a false one and that there's no such requirement.  If in doubt try asking 'Who can make a planning application?'   

I see. But as I read it, Tesco would still need the agreement of the owners/ leaseholder to submit proposals, so would need Poundland’s cooperation?

I suppose we’ll have to wait while this plays out. There’s applications re this site on the Southwark planning portal dating back over 70 years. In 1954, Woolworth’s applied to convert the original 4 shops here (Nos 29-35) into one Woolies but the council refused because the flats above the shops would be lost and there was a local housing shortage following the war.

Small businesses being displaced by big chains on Lordship Lane was already a trend back then.

1 hour ago, malumbu said:

many, particularly in urban areas, will see see the benefit of summoning a driverless vehicle, ultimately an autonomous pod,  to take them to their destination, including transport hubs.

 

 

What this town needs is a monorail! Yesiree!

7 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

Sam99p on Walworth road has been undercutting them for some time now.

At Poundland, you’re just paying for the name. Time will tell, I suppose.

That’s strange because the planning application to turn it into a Tesco Express, complete with ATM and alcohol licence is still current on the Southwark planning portal.

This seems to be the end of the road for now:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c36594lr29ko.amp

Driverless cabs have been coming next year (“he’s 10 minutes away, mate”) for at least the last decade.
 

I think they remain as unlikely as the other things which are always just over the horizon, such as NASA sending men back to the moon or Musk sending men to Mars. Or driverless Tube trains. They won’t happen, not because they are not possible but because the preposterous expense and effort in achieving them is totally out of whack with the possible advantages.
 

What is the point of driverless taxis? So, Uber has to pay drivers now but they don’t have to pay for vehicles, maintenance, fuel, insurance, depreciation or downtime, all of which they will have to cover in an autonomous fleet. Is there an advantage to customers over the present set up? Other than that some women travelling alone might prefer it, I can’t see any other benefit. 
 

From a passenger safety perspective, I’d be happy to use one. They would surely obey the speed limits and seat belted into an NCAP rated vehicle you are unlikely to come to much harm at 20 mph. The dangers would seem to be to pedestrians, cyclists, dogs, street furniture. It’s the planters I worry about.

Does anybody absolutely have to do a school run? In private cars? And how could all planned work be staggered without having a cumulative effect, delaying everything indefinitely?
 

I’m currently retired , so don’t have to commute but I don’t have a car and use buses daily. I’ve been walking a lot lately precisely because of the delays caused by all the works and I’m resigned to having to do that all summer. It’s annoying, without doubt. But I’m not presuming that it is somebody’s fault and looking for someone or something to blame. It’s just one aspect of life in a big city. This is not Poundbury.

17 minutes ago, EDmummy101 said:

 Hope that makes sense to everyone locally, 

Sorry but this makes no sense whatsoever. It could only make sense if we lived in a small town or village, not in one of the larger conurbations on earth.

The scheme by ED station is 2km from the South Circular work and nearly the same again from Rye Lane. If all roadworks in London had a 2km exclusion zone around them, nothing could get done.

To say that there can be no works in Peckham/ Denmark Hill/ Forest Hill because there are works in East Dulwich, imagines that London revolves around East Dulwich. If we extrapolate this policy, then if there are works in Forest Hill, there can be no works in Catford or Sydenham. If there are works in Catford, there can be none in Lewisham; gas works in Peckham would rule out water works in Nunhead, which have been delayed by resurfacing in Brockley, which was waiting on BT to finish in Ladywell. The knock-on effect would soon break London’s infrastructure.

Some works are essential, some desirable, some possibly even contentious but they will all cause disruption to some extent. Sometimes we just have to put up with it.
 

No, you didn’t write the article. But unless you’re a Telegraph subscriber, you haven’t read the article either. Have you read it?

The psychopath Telegraph lives behind a (rubber) paywall but using this kind of sensationalist, accusatory headline gets it traction on social media. The headline becomes more important than the article; many will see it and some will take it as a statement of fact. And it will be shown on endless “let’s take a look at the papers” segments on TV and radio for 12 hours or more in every news day.

And so, a tiny number of reactionary, right wing hacks has a vastly disproportionate influence on the popular conversation despite the papers they work for being bought by almost nobody these days. 

It seems that The South London Press has gone to the great recycling bin in the sky:

https://pressgazette.co.uk/publishers/regional-newspapers/south-london-press-closed/ 
 

I’ve not seen the printed paper in years, admittedly.

2 hours ago, satsuma said:

Just seen an alcohol licensing flyer for Tesco Express on the Poundland site - are Poundland heading off and we're getting a Tesco!?

The application in Tesco’s name is on the council’s website dated 23rd May. I’m presuming Tesco couldn’t make an application for a property they don’t already control?
After Poundland refitted the place, I would imagine Tesco would only have to change the branding and they’ve got a ready made new branch.

I thought I’d seen one there. I suppose that the key to operating this scam is having another ATM close by, so the card can be used immediately. Could be that they’ve used the same routine in that location before.

“54 Ea” must be 54, East Dulwich Road? Which is the other side of the road. Isn’t there a combined pay phone/ cash machine kiosk outside the Londis?

The estate is owned by Southern Housing Group, a housing association. They have a media enquiries link on their homepage: www.southernhousing.org.uk 

1 hour ago, Sue said:

What is "moral and pastoral theology"?

Something to do with sheep, I suspect.

Not really fussed about the sex parties but The Daily Telegraph is disgusting.