PK36

We have got a SureFlap Pet Door which is designed for larger cats (and small dogs). We also have a large cat but another reason we got this one was that it has a curfew mode so you can set it to lock and unlock at certain times to keep your cat in overnight. We bought it from Amazon for about ?75 a few months ago and it has been excellent so far. I'd also recommend Phil from Four Paws Doors http://www.fourpawsdoors.co.uk who fitted ours. He has lots of recommendations on here and did a very neat and tidy job with ours.

.

Sounds like retaliation from Moscow 17 gang for the recent killing of Rhyhiem Barton.

Is fitting in all the extra Cinderella Line stops, part of the reason why the morning rush hour trains from Denmark Hill to Blackfriars are going to be a lot less frequent with the new timetable? Currently there are seven direct trains between 8am and 9am (8.04, 8.13, 8.19, 8.26, 8.32, 8.39, 8.45), but from Monday it will be down to five trains (8.07, 8.17, 8.23, 8.37, 8.47)!

BrandNewGuy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > They'll be extending the all-night service next > year ? including the Overground line from Highbury > and Islington / Dalston Junction to Clapham > Junction via Denmark Hill, which will be very > useful. Have you got a source for that info as the only thing I can find is that the 2018 extension is for the northern part to Highbury & Islington, not to Clapham Junction (i.e. it will still end at New Cross Gate): https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/london-overground/london-overground-night-service

You could have a look at Sunshine Fruits which is a new Montessori nursery which has opened recently in Camberwell (so it may have spaces available?): http://sunshinefruits.co.uk It's located just off Peckham Road next to the old Southwark Town Hall. The rooms are lovely and bright and all the equipment and toys are brand new. Main issue is limited outside space as they only have shared access to a courtyard. Our daughter is due to start there in Jan 2018 when I go back to work from parental leave.

Sticking with the recent Camberwell focus, there is a new caf?/bar/roastery due to open at the end of March. Called Spike and Earl it is another venture by Peckham's Old Spike Roastery. It will be in the old Southwark Town Hall building which has recently been redeveloped into student accommodation.

The work doesn't look any better than the last time you posted these photos in 2014: http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?30,1341184,1341184#msg-1341184

Jay Rayner has just posted up a letter from 100+ former Alleyn's pupils who have written to the Headteacher of Alleyn's in support of Judith Kerr Primary School: http://www.jayrayner.co.uk/news/alleynspupils/

Not in ED, but I had my photos done in Snappy Snaps at Camberwell Green when I renewed my Australian passport last month.

Another recommendation for Fernando. We had him round for a day this week to tidy up the garden. We left the keys with him in the morning and by the time we got home from work he'd completely transformed it. We're now looking forward to planting some new flowers and shrubs in what were previously overgrown and weed filled beds. We shall definitely have him back should we need any future work in the garden. His phone number is 07946757938

A Southwark News article with a few photos of the new design: http://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/exclusive-dulwich-hamlets-proposed-new-stadium-revealed/

BrandNewGuy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > 2. The MOL designation is the urban equivalent of > green belt and as such any development already in > place (in this case the artificial pitch) can only > be developed or altered so as to have the same or > less impact on the surrounding land. So, for > instance, if there is an old pavilion on an area > of MOL, you can refurbish or rebuild it. What you > can't do is use its footprint to build something > substantially bigger and/or different. > > 3. 'Parkland' in itself cannot make up for the > loss of MOL. Moreover, Southwark Council are > currently in the process of declaring Green Dale a > Site of Importance to Nature Conservation, with > particular reference to the fact that it is > relatively 'wild' and has not been trimmned, > planted or cut. As such it maintains a unique mix > of flora and fauna (as well as plenty of dog > walkers!) that simply isn't there in a 'park' > environment. > Thanks for your reply BrandNewGuy - interesting to hear from someone who has a better understanding of the Green Dale site. I've only ever used it as a cut through and always thought it looked pretty unloved and was mainly used by dog walkers. Do you have any idea of the number of people who regularly use Green Dale and for what purpose/s? Regarding Point 2 - I'm not sure of the history of the site, but I presume the area where the artificial pitches are now must have only been designated as MOL after the pitches were built, as otherwise the fact they were built in the first place would seem to go against the rules/guidelines for MOL. Regarding Point 3 - it seems strange that Southwark Council are planning to declare Green Dale as a Site of Importance to Nature Conservation with reference to it's 'wild' nature, when their own plans include the creation of a playground, picnic area, pond and also involve the removal of some of the dense scrub in the southwest part. Regarding the ground not being 'sustainable' due to the possibility of promotion to the football league, I like your positivity, but I think any chance of that is a long, long way off, especially as we are now into the customary Hamlet late season wobble! I too, look forward to checking out the latest plans and hopefully a solution that suits (almost) everyone can be found.

Aristide Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > there is a reason its metropolitan open land, > everyone is always talking about building over > open space and what it does to grassroots sport > etc. Are you saying that as long as it gives cash > to the club then so be it? > > Hadley need to go away, realise that the punt > isn't going to work and count their losses. > > All this nonsense about Hadley helping the club > and the community is a smoke screen for brazen > property development and they hope that the > supporters and community at large will do their > bidding for them. While I do have a vested interest as I'm a Hamlet supporter, I struggle to see why some people are against the stadium and site proposals - I obviously haven't yet seen the new ones but assume they won't be too dissimilar to the old ones linked above. Looking at these old proposals, the new stadium is pretty much situated where the current artificial football pitches are. I understand that the artificial football pitches (which are in poor condition) are part of the area classified as metropolitan open land but I wouldn't consider them to be a wildlife habitat or parkland, which is probably what a lot of people think when they hear the term. Essentially, by having the artificial football pitches currently there, that part of the metropolitan open land is already built upon. Yes, the proposed stadium does encroach outside of the footprint of the artificial pitches on the north east part but that seems to be negated by a larger chunk on the south west side being turned back into parkland. So there would be a net gain in parkland with the stadium being built. I know that Southwark Council themselves have proposed their own plans for Green Dale Fields and with their plans they propose to upgrade/improve the artificial football pitches. So it seems that whether it is the Hadley proposal or the Council proposal, the area where the artificial pitches currently are, will remain as 'built-upon' land. It's not as if the Council are planning to get rid of the artificial pitches and turn the whole area back into parkland. With the Council proposal there also does not appear to be any increase in the total amount of parkland made available. The Hadley proposals also mention improvements to Green Dale Fields and of potentially working with the Council's plans so I would presume Hadley would also pay for some, if not all of the work that would be done on the parkland part of the site. In times of stretched Council budgets this would also be welcome. Obviously Hadley want to make money from developing the site, but it seems to me it could be a win-win for all parties. Dulwich Hamlet get a new sustainable stadium, which is fit for purpose, new housing is built (some of it being affordable), local community gets better sports facilities, Green Dale Fields parklands are improved, Council (potentially) saves money not having to upgrade parklands themselves, Hadley makes profit.

Story now on BBC website so that should increase the awareness: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-35596857