dwe

Dulwichdarling Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > childish trouble making. Hmmm alrite Sue dear, if > that is what using the word 'banter' deserves then > so be it > I stand by what I originally said > Park= dogs > Dogs= unpredictable even when trained > Don't like dogs= steer clear when you see them > Call me a w**nker= and you say I'm a childish > troublemaker? > Lots of love xxxx As you say, they are unpredictable, even when trained. So that is why they should be on leads unless in areas designated otherwise. Parks are for all people, and any behavior otherwise is selfish.

Well it obviously bothers plenty of people.

Louisa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > oimissus Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > if you don't like the 'same old stuff', Louisa, > > then don't read or post on it - just because > it's > > old news to you doesn't make it any less valid > to > > those for whom this is something new and quite > > upsetting. > > > > It's not old news or even news to anyone though is > it oimissus? It's just middle class venting on a > public forum because people have nothing else to > worry about or talk about. It's a park, lots of > people use it, stuff happens which is > inconsiderate. You deal with it on the spot, you > don't post about it on here. There was no biting > or anything bad involved, so why is it worthy of a > thread? We all live in a big city, lots of people > and animals all sharing a small space. Some of > these people or animals will be out of control, > most won't. No one was hurt, dog owner needs to > learn to control dog and parent needs to socialise > kid with more dogs so child isn't scared. "I was > in the park and this happened today". Boring. > > > Louisa. Middle class venting? You have remarkable powers of perception.

Park doesn't equal dogs playing off their leads though. Dogs playing in areas of the park where they are allowed to be off their leads.

Surely having a dog or child brings with it responsibility, or should we all just do what we like? If a dog is off a lead in an area of the park where they are meant to be controlled, and they bite someone then presumably all hell will break lose. Why is it not better for everyone to reduce the chances of this happening ? This is nothing about namby pambyism, rather common sense and consideration for other park users. If people don't like dogs, then avoid the areas where they are able to be off the lead, and vice versa.

Louisa, what is the point of that comment?

As I understand it "dogs can run free in the common but will need to be on a lead around the cultivated gardens and play areas of the park. The arboretum is a dog-free zone." Anything that goes against this would be pretty selfish.

My HH to Blackfriars train was on time this morning :).

Great if you have access to twitter....not so great if you rely upon the signage at the station, or internet.

It is pretty disgraceful. This morning I stayed on the LV train instead of changing at HH for the Blackfriars train as the information boards were so useless. It is almost as if they try and be as unhelpful as possible.

I'd like to elaborate on my journey this morning. I get the 5.59 from Kent House, change at Herne Hill and wait for the Blackfriars train. Both trains were on time according the National Rail website when I left my house. I got off at HH and the electronic board on the platform for the Blackfriars train suggested a goods train was passing through (which it often does), but no mention of the cancelled train. The guard at the station had to walk up and down the platform telling people that Thameslink trains were buggered, and that we were advised to wait for a Victoria train in 30 mins time. There were about 20 of us that had just got off the Victoria service to catch the Blackfriars connection, as there was no indication it was cancelled. A Thamselink train turned up, stopped at HH, refused to open its doors, and then went on its merry way. I asked the guard why the boards weren't updated (they are done at Three Bridges apparently), and why the train that stopped couldn't open its doors (not allowed to make unscheduled stops). You really could make it up.

I didn't see this email until just now but can conform the trains are still buggered.....I checked on the National Rail enquiries website this morning and it all seemed fine - even had one train pull into HH and stop but they wouldn't let anybody on.

I am sure the owners that let their dogs chew swings etc would happily let them chew furniture in their own homes too.

People that don't clear up their dog's poo are irresponsible, as are those that willfully let their dogs damage property.

Firstly, I think Sydenham and Honor Oak are quite a bit cheaper, and Penge significantly so. The second point is one that I would agree with - as ED becomes expensive the surrounding areas will eventually become more expensive as large numbers of people are priced out of purchasing in ED or decide that the value for money in surrounding areas is "better" for them. This is surely how the housing market has been for years? No one has a right to live in a particular area.....

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > But both are further out of town and you pay a > premium for being close to London. ED, compared to > other areas within 5 miles of the centre, is still > relatively cheap. > > dwe Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Ok 2 other areas (off the top of my head) that > are > > more affordable - Penge and Sydenham..... > > > > ED has everything really in situ, a gentrified > > high street, with decent bars and shops, but it > > wasn't always the case. The current house > prices > > there are reflecting this. > > > > Penge however has little gentrification, but > > excellent transport links to both the City and > > Victoria, as well as into Shoreditch etc. It > also > > has a decent amount of housing that is not that > > different to the housing in ED. You honestly think that premium is due to 5 minutes less on a train?

Ok 2 other areas (off the top of my head) that are more affordable - Penge and Sydenham..... ED has everything really in situ, a gentrified high street, with decent bars and shops, but it wasn't always the case. The current house prices there are reflecting this. Penge however has little gentrification, but excellent transport links to both the City and Victoria, as well as into Shoreditch etc. It also has a decent amount of housing that is not that different to the housing in ED.

I agree simonthebeaver, and that is the thing I find worrying, rather than ED suddenly becoming out of reach, because I would say that ED is one of the most popular areas in SE London and as such its house prices will be expensive. In terms of zone 2 (or zone 3 or 4) I am not sure that the fare difference is all that great. As such, Honor Oak Park for example would be far cheaper as an area to buy than ED.

There are numerous areas close by to ED that are cheaper, as I mentioned above.

I agree comletely regarding the rate of change and to me that is real the issue. As a father of 2 young kids I wonder how they will be able to get on the housing ladder in years to come. In terms of having to move away from an area that you regard as home, I think it has always been thus. I know when I bought my first house 16 years ago I had to compromise on the area I was moving into. It is to me, unrealistic for a first time buyer to assume you would be able to buy in an area like ED. It is worth considering however that the Penge / Sydenham / Anderley of today is likely to be very different to the one we will see in 15 years time.

Surely if you have ?650k then you have a healthy choice of areas? The title of the thread is "Trying to buy a house in this area is near impossible" - East Dulwich is seen as a highly desirable area and as such it attracts a healthy premium, pricing many people out. It is more expensive than Sydenham, which is more expensive than Anerley etc... I'd quite like to live in Dulwich Village but can't afford it, so I live somewhere else.

Many of things that make East Dulwich attractive are a direct result of the area being affordable a few years ago to people who would have not been able to buy in the more expensive surrounding areas. I am not sure I would describe the area as up and coming now, as the next generation of younger people wont be able to buy there, and will instead move to cheaper areas, such as Sydenham or Penge, with interesting bars and shops eventually opening up there as a result, as happened in East Dulwich. 10 years ago there was probably an interesting mix new people buying in the area, but with the prices as they are, the area is really only affordable to those with access to a healthy deposit (Mum and Dad?) or those with banker style salaries.

I think Penge is a good alternative.....lots of cheaper Victorian and Edwardian terracing....good transport links to different areas of central London. I think it will attract the same kind of people that East Dulwich attracted 15 years ago as it is affordable with lots of retail rental space. The schooling around there is also improving with the Harris Academies.