Frisco

"When trees were planted 130 years ago in roads, the planters cannot for one minute, have thought they would still be there all this time later." What rubbish, there were equally aged trees in existence 130 years ago. There needs to be an effective plan of management and replacement, which doesn't involve the destruction of healthy trees without very good reason, and certainly not just at the instigation of insurance companies.

_I agree, I can heartily recommend Osbourne Stewart estage agents, for their friendly yet professional service. They make you feel right at home when you walk through the door!_ Do you have to sell your house to use the internet there?

Lets hope that our local councillors are reading this. As far as I know, Southwark Council should have an aboricultural policy and plan that council staff or contractors work to. If these aren't in place, it's plainly ridiculous and needs putting right. However, my guess is that if you called up to ask about this, you got the Council's inadequate call centre system, where no one who answers knows anything about anything, and acts as a barrier to speaking to someone who does. I'm not sure how or why we let our council get away with this. "Having suffered subsidence caused by a large Horse Chestnut street tree I'm afraid I have little sympathy." I sympathise with you, but that's no excuse for cutting down trees that aren't (apparently) causing problems. It's ironical that a number of trees in the part of Melbourne Grove you refer to were lost in the great storm of October 1987, with quite wide regret at their loss. One of the joys of living in South London is the green spaces and abundant trees.

"I agree about Camberwell but can you source where Jenny has said she lives in East Dulwich?" That's not quite what I said, I said 'she seems'. I'm reasonably sure that I recently read in one of her columns in a freebie magazine that comes through the letterbox columns that she preferred to be associated with ED rather than Camberwell, which has not 'arrived' in quite the sense that ED (apparently) has. That's my recollection.

"I mean The Grove. Is ED claiming her too?" She lives on Grove Lane, but, from her writings, she seems to want to claim to be in ED herself. I moved to ED from Camberwell years ago, and you can keep it. However, stopping the trains from London Bridge to Victoria (via Denmark Hill) would be stupid, and it probably illustrates National Rail's inability to be a constructive part of integrated transport systems.

"Previous councillor, Sarah Welfare, was very good." That was my view and experience too. ED turned Lib Dems at the last election and I've been a bit disappointed how quiet they seem to have been on local and community issues. Perhaps they think they've got ED sown up now with the recent demographic changes in the area.

"It'll be too cold to sit outside on them soon anyway. Brrrr, getting a bit nippy out isn't it." According to the weather forecast it's going to be 21 degrees on Thursday.

"I plan to build up a file of poor service to send to their customer services team" Haven't GNER just lost the contract for East Coast train services? If I'm right, I doubt GNER customers services will be interested, but the rail regulator should be.

"Lower your carbon footprint and ditch the motor and you can lower car crime at the same time." Is this an indication of empathy with the perpetrators? As for a reduction in car ownership reducing crime, mindless vandalism of property was around long before the internal combustion engine.

Much like Keef, I too can't bring myself to support "not in my back yard" politics. There are drug users in East Dulwich, regardless of whether this syringe exchange or methadone service is agreed. It the PCT hasn't undertaken the legally required consultation then they should be held to account and made to do it, but it doesn't then follow that the NIMBYs should get their way. I learned this evening that at least one rough sleeping drug user has been identified as sleeping in the private grounds of a property, part of which is a nursery. I suspect this person is not alone in the area, and I'd far rather that his or her used 'works' were safely and discreetly deposited at a needle exchange, than shared with other users or dumped where unsuspecting people could suffer sharp injuries. I haven't quite made up my mind about methadone as a treatment, but while drug rehabilitation services remain so under resourced in comparison to the problem and the resulting need, I can't really see this form of treatment being currently ruled out completely.

"Is it of particular architectural merit? If not then a like for like replacement would be OK surely? Refrubishing it could easily cost more in money and resources than a new build - and a new build could be more energy efficient." That depends on your view of architectural merit I suppose. It is a very good and attractive example of a large Victorian detached villa (which is unusual in ED) and it one of a short but complete row of them. My point was that had action been taken 20 years ago, it may be that the building could have been kept in use and saved. However, it seems to have been left to rot.

_I've never thought that E D will become like Clapham where practically every house is House and Garden'd. Nero_ People used to say that about Clapham 25 years ago when I lived there, just after I moved from Fulham. The yummy mummies are taking over everywhere. It's just a matter of time. It was the twentieth anniversary of me moving to ED last week, in order to escape. I moved in just two weeks before the great storm of October 1987.

I wonder if TJ intends to stand at the next General Election? If so, she may face a lot of criticism for not spending much time in her constituency, and even be held to account for it had risk the consequences. Labour has taken its eye of the ball in places like ED, although the make-up of the local electorate has changed enormously in the last ten years and the Lib Dems seem to be the main beneficiaries of that change, so far. I'd have thought it would have done TJ no political harm at all locally to have bought a place in her constituency, rather than further away in Highgate, than she was in Kentish Town. However, I'm sure she thinks she knows best. The last time I had any reasons to contact her was when areas of ED were without water, followed by low water pressure, a few years ago, following a mains burst near Peckham Rye. I never heard a thing back from her at that time, even to let me know what she was doing to put pressure on Thames Water, and this failure coloured my view of her as a constituency MP. Also, Chris Bryant, as a former vicar, is bound to have a good understanding of the importance to looking after the pastoral needs of his constituents.

I blame Foxtons myself, it's all their staff checking up on what we're doing. ;-)

"like the massive ugly plastic church that replaced the original one with its Cotswald stone and gothic arch windows" Is this that the original church that was falling down, and (together with the former St Silas) faced massively prohibitive costs to repair, update and make fit for purpose in the 21st century? If it is, the new St Anthony with St Silas is not massive, ugly or plastic and it is a spiritual place with a diverse, active and inclusive congregation that plays an important role, as well as enabling the provision of important community services for the local population. Its modern architecture may not be to your taste, but everyone won't be pleased with everything, and that doesn't mean that the new church building isn't of a high quality and standard.

_apparently it has been like that for seven years_ It's been like that (evidence of subsidence) for 20 years. It's probably been empty for 12 or more, and I'm pretty sure something could have been done before now to save the existing structure.

"On the junction of Upland Road and Crystal Palace Road is a large well-protected house, with huge gates, anti-climb fencing and reflective windows. It has no identifier apart from the sign 'HAZCHEM' on the hefty front door. Is there any substance to the rumour it's an MI5 safe-house?" If we're talking about the same place, that building used to be East Dulwich Police Station. I've often wondered what it's used for now.

"Not E Dulwich, but Masters Superfish on Waterloo Road (about 5 mins past the Old Vic as you walk away from Waterloo towards Elephant) does fantastic fish and chips. Its a licensed restaurant too. Its not a flash place and it is fully of black cab drivers, but to be recommended." I had fish and chips at Masters a month ago and I wasn't impressed with their chips at all. About a month before that I got some from Olley's at Herne Hill (which I've been to before and liked) and the chips I had were horrible. I have fish and chips too infrequently to chance disappointment, so it'll have to be back to the Sea Shell in Lisson Grove next time. It's been consistently good for years.

"From my knowledge of Southwark council they have very different requirements than the Royal parks, but as you say this is something of an impasse." I also thought I'd indicated that when I wrote: "While Southwark Council may not see such tight stipulation as a viable option for its leisure outlets on certain sites" Also, the work I've done in this area in the past has been for a local authority not that dissimilar to Southwark, other than it has a higher CPA rating.

"Hence all the concrete-tiled rooves, pebbledash and metal framed or non-standard windows in the area, especially in the shops opposite the Co-op block on LL." Well observed, but if you sit in the (East?) Dulwich Cafe and you can get a good view of the roof the building immediately opposite (I think it's a dentist), and you will see a very good and increasingly rare example of an elaborately slated roof and an ornate brick chimney stack, which is how the whole of East Dulwich used to be.

"New standards cannot just be added. We are talking about a legal contract." I'll state again that I clearly wrote, 'they can also be contractually obliged to meet certain previously notified standards'. "So how will the ice cream man be made to provide me nutritionally balanced snacks for kids?" Ice cream is by definition ice cream and I never suggested that all food that's considered unhealthy in excess would or should be banned from parks and outlets in them. However, the standard of products retailed in parks can be specified in a contract. Plus, lots of ice cream vendors these days sell other things from their vans besides ice cream, such as hot-dogs and other similar items. An agreement between a council and a retail contractor could specify exactly what can be sold. While Southwark Council may not see such tight stipulation as a viable option for its leisure outlets on certain sites, organisations like the Royal Parks impose very tight regulations on contractors and what can be sold on their property. Anyway, you clearly have your view and I have mine, and it appears that we have exhausted the possibility of agreement.

"No it is not a community service. You can't retrospectively make it so." "I doubt very much that this outlet were given community goals as part of their lease." You seem to have missed that I wrote "they can also be contractually obliged to meet certain previously notified standards", which seemed to me to rule out retrospective requirements. New requirements can be included in new leases or operating licences, and often are. Rather than just doubting, you could find out for sure by asking Southwark Council a direct question about that under the Freedom of Information Act. "The council is simply interested in the income - as they always are". Again, that is untrue and you obviously have no knowledge of local authority procurement, and who and what can influence it. I've given the example of how leisure centre catering outlets have been changed all over the country. "If what you say is correct I take it that the bicylce/velo sales guy and the ice cream van are also working for the public good as per dictat from LB Southark?" If they are operating in the park with the permission of Southwark Council, or elsewhere on the basis of a contract with them, then then there is likely to be an agreement as to what can and cannot be sold.

"it is ultimately about what punters want. It's not a public service." Untrue. Parks are a public service and the facilities operating in them contribute to that. They can also be contractually obliged to meet certain previously notified standards. This is how and why lots of local authority swimming pools/leisure centres have moved their catering outlets away from serving just fizzy drinks and chips. Local authorities can reasonably influence, or even stipulate, the type of food products that are sold from their recreational sites.

When I was studying management, X (ahem...) years ago, the Dulwich Harvester was used as a text book example of best practice and successful of a self-managed staff team in a work environment. That was considered as the future for the management of all staff teams, once. I wonder if they still do it there?

"you can contact them via their website" While it's often hard to accurately determine standards etc from websites, if what it states is correct, the place seems a thousand times better than its predecessor. I'll look in and see, if I manage to get that far into Dulwich Park.