louisiana

Note that while the gasworks give a start date, there is not an end date. :-S

There are definitely gas smells down by the Plough. And a total lack of workmen along the entire stretch, except for one on the 'outside' of the works, leaning on the fence to admire the massive holes on the other side. Once again, the pedestrians are getting a raw deal... your life in their hands etc.

I thought I had moth-moths, like the rest of ED. Thought I'd got rid of them, then they returned. Now I find they are meal moths aka Indian meal moths (not clothes moths). They simply adore anything wholemeal. Wholemeal flour. Wholemeal rice. They'll go for non-wholemeal only where no other sustenance. Seeds also, and some other grains. I think the return of the moths coincided with purchase of large bag wholemeal rice, so I may have inadvertently re-imported them. I sent off for some pheromone thingies as well as killer space-spray. I thought the pheromone traps were doing nothing, and then 7 or 8 of the buggers were trapped in one night, swimming in the glue, in just one trap. Meantime, I think I'm going to have to clear absolutely everything flour or rice or grain-based from my kitchen, once again. The buggers even manage to get into glass jars with tight plastic seals (and of course tins) so difficult to know what I can use to store stuff.

One of these.

A stone through their collective windows. Parasites!

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi louisiana, > The recession has not been good for that scheme. > I'm due to call the developers and will do so > today. James, I'm tempted to ask: do you know of any St Aidan's scheme that the firm has actually delivered? We're currently looking at St Aidan's schemes in various locations in the district (e.g. SE19, where the company has been trying to retrospectively regularise an unlawful and unsightly second-hand car dealership in the middle of a conservation area, which is no doubt generating funds to pay for things like Ivan Bateman's Channel Island hideaway *but.*...) We can find little that this developer actually delivers to local communities. As far as I can see, St Aidan's specialises in selling on once it gets planning permission (basically: speculation), which does make me wonder how St Aidan's manages to get to sit at the table with councils in this fashion... So I'd be interested to any schemes you can point me to where St Aidan's has actually developed something - anything - lawful and with community support.

James Any news on the new library at 18-22 Grove Vale? Permission granted January 2008 after extensive discussions with St Aidan's.

And another in Overhill Road a little while ago... Not a million miles from Court Lane bottom end. As someone who's been mugged several times, I do appreciate these little reminders (given that I live between one and the other, and that there were also muggings in Fireman's Alley not so long ago).

Ah yes, I'm with the completely ignore...

david_carnell Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > On a nicer note, whilst strolling up by Sydenham > Hill Station yesterday I spotted a peacock. It was > just wandering around the street and then into > someone's front garden. Having watched/followed it > for some minutes it did the a most un-peacock like > thing and flew onto the roof. Quite impressive, > mind you. I have pictures on my phone I shall > attempt to upload later in the day. That'll be one of the peacocks that escaped from Tracy Thier's place on Sydenham Hill.

Let?s face it EDF?you don?t like them because you have prejudiced PB attitudes about the the whole gambling thing plus you don?t like their hardcore demographic? One reason I'm not keen is that a close family member ended his life over gambling debts (when his children were still small), having gambled away his business and home and left his family destitute.

Just in case you don't know, Dulwich now has its very own demonstrator veg garden, round the back of Rosebery Lodge in the park. Andy B is the main mover and shaker there, and the enterprise relies totally on lovely Dulwich volunteers (who also get to eat some goodies). Dulwich Vegetable Garden is an initiative of Dulwich Going Greener, and the DVG peeps have worked closely with Southwark Council to make this happen. (DGG's remit is somewhat wider, including film shows, talks, recycling/bring and take events, energy etc. etc., not just food.) There is work going on down at DVG various days each week, plus special events as and when (e.g. there were lots of demo sessions during the Dulwich Festival fair). DVG harvest open day is planned for Saturday 25 September. Dulwich Vegetable Garden is on twitter and Facebook: @DulwichDVG [www.facebook.com] and Dulwich Going Greener is on twitter and has a website: @dulwichgreener [www.dulwichgoinggreener.org.uk] To sign up for all DGG events, just write to: [email protected] As many of you will know, the local allotment situation is fairly dire (incredibly long or closed waiting lists) but we hope through DVG and DGG to push forward this agenda locally and make some headway on land available for allotments (they can only say no!), as well of course as encouraging local people to grow things, and supporting them in doing so. Some things DGG is considering re local food: - a seed swap - a seedling swap - a recipe book for typical glut vegetables - bring novice growers together around DVG/DGG - find more local land If you have any ideas, do let me know. And if you'd like to get involved in DVG, do turn up at DVG workdays or contact Andy B through DVG's twitter or FB. Lou

Just posted something on Dulwich Veg Garden on a new thread.

Cut and come again lettuce is doing really well... but the tomatoes (two varieties) stalled in early July after a promising start and only now seem to be getting going again. There should be a glut when they do. Chillies (including a Dorset Naga) doing well. Courgettes a bit of a disappointment so far. On herbs: chives, Giant Napoli parsley, tiny-leaved basil, and oregano (all grown from seed) all doing well. Coriander bolting as usual - I must remember to keep on sowing more seeds. Experimenting with black Tuscan kale (coming along slowly) and some rather weird black climbing beans (not traditional runners). On non-edible, my foxgloves and hollyhocks from seed are doing well, but the delphiniums proved poor at germinating so I don't have many. The fig and plum I planted two years ago are now bearing fruit, as is the vine I planted last year (not much though!)

I did report the Jersey Tiger sightings here last year to one of the main monitoring sites... They told me the moths had already been around in London for a little while, though last year we saw a population explosion.

Already reported by me on this thread a few days ago.... and last year too. In other words, the story is not correct: they've been around here for a while (last year I saw hundreds).

DJKillaQueen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > KalamityKel Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > You'd have to build a strong case up with the > > police and the council > > If people are taking illegal drugs on the premises > (as has been alluded to) and you can prove it then > that would be grounds for revoking the > license....just an idea. The onus is on the > premises to do all they can to prevent illegal > drug use. Traces of coke in the ladies has been enough to close down at least one central London club recently.

Did you duck?

garden man Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The LDA held 3 years of talks with locals & local > interest groups,then Ken lost & Boris suspended > things, An interesting interpretation. The LDA made three planning applications concerning the park and its future, the so-called Masterplan. A public inquiry (the applications were called in by the Secretary of State) was held into these with hearings taking place in Crystal Palace up to September 2009. The inquiry inspector reported last week. Given that the government is due to abolish regional development agencies (?)... but last week it was agreed that ?87 > million would be invested in the park, It was agreed by whom? Last week, the inquiry inspector's report was published, and the inspector approved the three planning applications and set out a scheme which might guarantee a 'little' money for the scheme (probably less than 10% of scheme cost, maybe a lot less) from sale of land for housing on two sites in the PArk. The secretary of state scrubbed out the 'guarantee' (from any developer) which his department felt would be akin to a 'tax'. That matter was dealt with in his 30-odd page letter (not in the main report). So, as is, the scheme has no guaranteed funding. It seems unlikely that public funds will be found in the current climate. but not sure > where the moneys'coming from.The land being used > for new housing will be the camp/caravan > site, A number of sites in and next to the Park are planned to have new building. These include Capel Manor new college building (on the green on the Anerley Hill side), housing development at Rockhills (north-west corner) and housing development at Sydenham Gate (northern side). Both the latter are inside the Park, while the first is on the edge of the Park but outside the Park boundary. The camping site would become Metropolitan Open Land (see for example paragraph 24 of the secretary of state's letter) and so - eventually - add to the total pot of MOL. And because the campsite removal would eventually result in increased total of MOL, there are Very Special Circumstance to justify sale of some MOL for housing, sez the Inspector. which it is expected to move to the Olympic > site. The campsite has a lease until 2018 or 2019 and has the legal right to stay until then. AFAIK, there is no site or location for it to move to (though some attempt to track one down was made at some point). A precedent was set for the sale of land to > fund the park when all the land was sold to build > the current villas down Crystal Palace Park road > around the 1880s. The decision to sell some land was based on current English planning law and planning policy guidelines concerning the possible uses of Metropolitan Open Land (a class of land which didn't exist in the 1880s). (Some have argued that this present case might set a precedent for other MOL elsewhere, though). Did we read the same report?

I was over the moon the first time I saw them, so frantically tried to find out what they were, and the bloke that runs one of the butterflies and moths websites ID'd it straight away.

I think in the past the question has been raised of how so many betting shops manage to survive on our high streets. Today an article in the Standard states that William Hill has '170 unprofitable shops, 50 of which are "under review".' I'm sure they're not alone.

The handover of CP Park to Bromley Council basically led to quite a few Park resources becoming under-utilised (some would say mis-managed) and to several areas of the Park falling into decline. Yes, there used to be a few events, expensive and poorly publicised. They weren't really trying. The bowl layout is a bit of a mixed blessing. The water means that it's not so suitable for events where people need to be up close, and while the slope is ideal in dry conditions, it can become incredibly boggy quite quickly. The report of the public inquiry into the future of the CP Park came out last week after much delay (the inspector was ill). I haven't had time to read it all yet (very long), but I understand that the inspector supports the sale of some Park land for housing, in order to pay a (minor) contribution towards Park improvements.

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Lot of these about at the moment .... garden tiger > moths This year I'm once again getting lots of Jersey Tigers http://www.uksafari.com/jerseytigers.htm They love to bask on the kitchen windows. Today I've also noticed a huge number of flying ants around my front door. Not so nice.

Ligaturiosity, given that you seem to think it's fine and dandy for people to publicly berate adults behaving in a way they personally disapprove of, may I just say that I think your behaviour in this case was pretty obnoxious. Have you no sense of decorum? No manners? Next time this urge comes over you, why not ask yourself: 'What would the Queen do?' I think you'll find that members of polite society do not behave in the way you advocate. Except behind closed doors with servants and factory workers. And if you'd rather such displays of behaviour you disapprove of be banned from British streets, may I suggest you campaign to elect a government that supports your views and is willing to change the law to accommodate them? And in the meantime confine your outbursts to your servants and factory workers.

Well done, ruffers. A classic of stupidity.