Borderlands

Why on earth are they doing this move around? Was loads of stuff being missed by complaining customers, or were shelves full of food'n'stuff that no-one bought? Beware, it's a major mess up. I know their stocks seem to be poorly managed nowadays since supply chains have become more difficult, meaning from week to week you can never be sure an item you usually buy will be there. But added to that, during their current game of pass the parcel with products, is that it might be impossible to find because of some weird shelving choices management have made. What's more they haven't bothered to put up any signage for temporary positioning of goods at the end of each bay. Other aspects of recent developments in store show total contempt for customers on foot who pay by cash or want to use serviced tills. Presumably management in this branch want it to become a product warehouse with minimum footfall, leaving aisles free for their delivery service staff to whizz around unobstructed by actual shoppers who know their way round. I pity the staff who are trying their best. May be the local manager would like to explain the whys and wherefores to posters here.

Sorry, just seen this. Definitely liked to know about this and the failure of the units. Will wait for pm.

Now that Sundial Property services has disappeared, we're looking to find another installer/joiner/carpenters that uses Slimlite, as this still seems like the best option for refurbing or replacing a couple of sash windows. Anyone got any advice about finding a firm that is familiar with Slimlite and has a good reputation (pics, reviews etc)? As always, thanks for any help with this.

There are loads of private audiologists around now and at least a couple near or off Lordship Lane. I noticed one just off Zenoria Street in Tintagel Gardens.

I remember the green space before Sainsbury's was built on it and the fight to try and protect it, which was obviously not won. The tiny park is better than nothing but in no way compensates for the giant carpark that is completely out of scale with the store itself. Greendale is all that is now left of the MOL - and it is not a huge area by any stretch of the imagination. It needs formal protection now. Someone posting here seems to think that the only importance of green spaces has to do with it being full of people all the time - but that could never be the case even for formal parks. But Greendale should not be considered as if it is some kind of untended park that needs to be prettified, made more parklike and have chunks removed for private benefit only: it is a rare green informal oasis - a wildspace- accessible to the public in a landscape otherwise full of privately owned acres rising to the Sydenham Hill ridge. I've objected again to the development, this time to the demand to remove covenants and clauses that are there for very good reasons. My objection to the removal of clauses restricting development has nothing to do with whether the football stadium rebuild is necessary or whether football fans are more deserving than residents. This is about reminding Southwark about why they put in the restrictive clauses in first place. And the reasons are still pertinent so they should not be removed. If they are, it will reveal just how threadbare Southwark Council's actual claims to care for our greenspaces, wild, parkified, or ancient, really is as others have pointed out (look at the misuse of Peckham Rye Park for the Gala). The removal of the clauses will also not guarantee the building of a new stadium with its privatised commercial facilities that the fans (who may not be residents) are hoping for. It was pretty clear when applications were put in during the 1990s to build on the green field sites off Dog Kennel Hill (I think most of it was Crown Property or belonged to King's College) that the developer’s primary aim was (and probably still is) to build dense multi-storey housing (out of keeping with the area on that side of road) and that they decided the best way to persuade to the council to allow this was offering some kind of community benefit - ie., the refurbishment or rebuild of the football stadium and, perhaps, new facilities. Of course, the idea was not a commitment to actually to do it….The plans to move/build a new stadium, seem to me to be a kind of Trojan horse application, in the full knowledge of the potentially more remunerative possible housing estate. LB Southwark seemed to see through this offer when they put the covenants and clauses in place and made sure that the application/s specified the football grounds must come first and be completed before any housing estate was built with all the attendant disruption, noise and extra traffic affecting to the local community. They also knew that even outline planning permission for housing could simply end up with the land being sold on for gazillions without any housing or the football club being rebuilt. Then the developer's plans revealed the planned erosion of the MOL and there was an outcry as informal open green space like Greendale is a rarity in this area. But the protection offered for MOL is generally very weak. Really the whole area needs some kind of designation, like Local Nature Reserve (with the astroturf given some kind of protection as a free community amenity?). Then that would mean we don't revisit countless applications for development -and Southwark Council abetting the eroding of the MOL's value or allowing building or encroachment by tipping or whatever during building works that can nibble and nibble away at it until it is gone. I remember even during Thatcher's time in power how the council did it's utmost to support a true green agenda with real protections and money funding to build on what we had/have in the borough. Unlike now.

Does anyone know what has happened to Sundial. Have seen lots of reccommendations for Steve and his team for sash window refurb and replacement, but the web address that was viewable in 2022 is no longer available. May be the company is no longer trading? Any one know about this - if necessary send me a private message. I was interested in the "slimmer" double-glazed sashes mentioned on their website but didn't follow this up at the time I looked. Thanks

Update from Conways: they are apprently planning to move the entire post box to the corner of adjacent road and Ivanhoe Road. So that explains the situation. Hope that works out and that it remains in good condition.

Came past this bit of awful workmanship. Looks as if this job is considered to be finished. Didn't anyone from their team use a form to be able to cut the new paving slabs with arcs to fit around the postbox? What on earth are they are going to do now! That's cast iron and just shoving a load of clay and bits from the pavement works around it, isn't going to protect the anchor. Conways, this is supposed to be beneath pavement level - surely that's obvious! This is an important and useful vintage Victorian postbox, now standing on the equivalent of its tippy toes. There doesn't seem to be a way to contact the Royal Mail about this so it can be saved before it gets damaged or is accidentally toppled. Post box close to corner of Avondale Rise and Ivanhoe Road.

Many thanks for photos. Hope the display survives! Anyone interested in looking for WW2 bomb damage in the area (and London) might like to take a look at: https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/things-to-do/history-and-heritage/london-metropolitan-archives/collections/london-county-council-bomb-damage-maps Sorry for the very long link. There's also a book of them by Laurence Ward ISBN:9780500518250. It's quite pricey but is probably available from the library. Zak Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > A couple of pictures,for anyone who is > interested,taken at last Saturday's unveiling of > the new information board about the stretcher > fences on Quorn Road. > > One of the info. board itself & another of the guy > from the Dulwich Society giving a background talk. > > > Hopefully when they're opened they can be enlarged > - the stuff on the info board is quite > interesting.

My father who grew up in Wood Green during WW2 was visiting here in the 1990s and spotted these on one of our walks. And was delighted they had survived - up to that point. He told us they were very basic (but heavy to carry) stretchers and huge numbers had been made in case of civilian casualties but were not needed. He saw them used this way as fencing on LCC (London County Council) estates in his beck of the woods too. His view was that things were so tight economically postwar that this was considered a really inspired use for them. Nothing wasted. DulwichSociety Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This event is still going ahead tomorrow at 11am > so we hope to see you there. Southwark's mayor and > local councillors are hoping to be there too. The > stretcher railings were deteriorating badly so had > to be removed, we are glad a couple are still > there to help tell the story and we hope our > information board will add context.

Thanks for many helpful suggestions - I was about to go to Kings and not worry about a GP letter when I was sent an email invite to book a booster at the Tessa Jowell so got that sorted. Bit of an odd coincidence considering sent in my email to EDF yesterday. Would like to understand why it was not included on the NHS booking website (or is it governmental?)along with all the others the algorithn considers to be near where you live once you've put in your postcode.

Looked on SELDOC website and it said that booking is required. If Tessa Jowell requires a booking then that doesn't seem to mean "walk-in" as in "got time now, so I'll go along". Same for Lister Health Centre. And Kings requires a letter from a GP. What do you do if you don't have this - even if you have a letter from NHS about needing to get a booster? Bic Basher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > malumbu Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Tessa Jowell doing walk ins, but don't go there > if > > you haven't reached your 6 months and a week, > > although I went next door and had my first ever > > flu jab.... It was 12 for walk ins on the day > I > > tried with about a 20 minute wait. > > Was that upstairs where the surgery is or at the > Day Lewis Pharmacy downstairs? My mother is > having her booster at Tessa Jowell upstairs next > week through the GP.

The proposed changes to Melbourne Grove restrictions are a nonsense. If deliveries and collections come from the other end, they will still have to do umpteen three point turns to change about and leave the road. This road in particular they should just open up again and keep an element of traffic dispersal for Grove Vale and Lordship Lane so things don't get so gummed-up for everyone. And the stuff about Court Lane going into Dulwich Village is odd. The junction is awkward, but according to these ideas they are aiming for something picturesque that simply won't happen. It's the most major road between Dulwich and Forest Hill, and lots of the large houses are well set back from the road so apart from the junction what is the pollution issue here really? Oh yeah, and I realise this is all about travel rather than about the environment as such, where are plans to replace the numerous street trees that have been removed in this area over the past few years by the council? Do they really prefer proliferating wheelie bins taking over the pavement rather than trees whose leaves need sweeping up in the autumn? Their current preferred street tree surgeons just hack away with not a care in the world as if all of them are large plane trees. Shocking. legalalien Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'm not horrified at the prospect of the council > making a decision that goes against the wishes of > local residents - sometimes governments have to > make unpopular decisions where they believe that > it's in the best interest of their constituency - > and if people don't like it, their remedy is the > ballot box. > > I am, though, still concerned by the things that > heartblock mentions, in particular the lack of > data, the treatment of data that is available, and > the overall lack of transparency throughout the > process. > > Do people have views on how much improvement the > proposed amendments will make e.g. moving the > North Melbourne closure to the other end, reducing > the times of closures, making Melbourne South > timed? The latter two must help a bit with > EDG/LL/ Croxted (it would be good if they could > restrict them to term time as well, and exclude > bank holidays?). I'm not sure what a timed school > street in Townley would do in terms of traffic > that currently heads south along that route - it > presumably gets shunted to LL and DV - I don't > know how much traffic we're talking about there? > > Presumably "Parallel work with TfL to make > improvements to junction safety for cyclists and > improve the flow of traffic at the junction of > Village Way, Dulwich Village and Red Post Hill." > means "putting in that cycle lane and restricting > straight ahead and right turning traffic to one > lane has been a complete disaster in terms of > creating traffic congestion through the village". > will watch that one with interest.

Hi The wooden cill/ threshold needs cutting out and replacing for outward opening french doors/windows. Can anyone reccommend a responsible and careful carpenter/handy man that can quote and do the work for this. No self-reccommendations, please. Thanks

Yeah, driller dentists. I remember an Australian dentist in the 1980s detailing the full of extent of the damage such enthusiasts for unnecessary fillings and removals had done to me in my childhood. But by then most of what they had done could not be remedied. Now I can see how many cosmetic options are available privately (at considerable cost) but what about what is actually needed? Actual dentistry? Now. Head in hands.