Penguin68

We believe the Diocese of Southwark has faculty over felling of trees and disturbing graves on consecrated ground. Please see their letter to the LB of Southwark, link below. The only link is to your interpretation of their letter. It is correct that they have the option of granting a faculty as regards the disturbance, removal or mounding over of graves in consecrated grounds in municipal cemeteries, and it is possible that the removal of trees (over which they don't have a faculty) which were growing through graves (as some were following the woeful lack of care in the past) might, as a consequence, be said to have thus disturbed graves, but the removal of trees, in and of itself, is not covered by the need for any faculty. I suspect that the council might argue that the necessary clearances they undertook of scrub growth and (inter alia) Japanese Knotweed (which would not have required any faculty) was not part of any intended remodelling of the consecrated areas to extend their useful life, even though that may have been, for some graves, an unintended consequence. However I do not know whether the new gate and path on the Underhill Road side has extended into the consecrated area - in which case a faculty would have been required. I also suspect that were it not for the ill-informed lobbying (I say ill informed because a past post showed that rules solely regarding parish lands were being prayed-in-aid for municipal cemeteries by the lobbying group) the Diocese might have been able to grant necessary faculties more promptly. Of course the planning etc. rules should be being followed, but involving further imaginary rules makes no sense. Essentially your group is against using the cemeteries as cemeteries (i.e. places where people are buried, rather than were buried) - a point you have every right to make, but it is a debating point with which many (including the Church of England) would disagree.

t the moment, they are awaiting permission from the Diocese of Southwark to cut down up to 60 trees No they are not. They may be waiting for the Diocese to authorise the building of new paths or roads on consecrated ground, or the removal or alteration of burials on consecrated ground, including mounding and the removal or re-location of memorials (again only in consecrated ground). The Church of England's remit regarding municipal cemeteries only covers those areas which are 'consecrated' (and which would previously have been used for what are no longer called pauper's funerals). Most of the cemeteries' plots are not in 'consecrated' ground. The remit of the Church of England extends only to the extent and availability of consecrated land in municipal cemeteries (hence the need for them to agree new paths and roads which would reduce that availability) and to the treatment of those buried there. The remit of the diocese is much wider as regards church (i.e. parish) lands and burial sites, and that does extend to agreeing the felling of trees of a certain dimension. This remit has been regularly confused by this pressure group for the much more limited remit as regards municipal cemeteries. And, once again, the Church of England has always supported the re-use of burial grounds, where that is technically possible, so that burials can continue adjacent to their parishes, for the convenience of their parishioners.

For those living in houses (single or multiple occupancy) it was about 25 (or fewer) years ago that the council first issued wheelie bins - (green in colour) to replace the old style dustbins most people had - then about 10-12 years ago they issued blue plastic boxes for recycling tins and bottles and blue bags for paper and cardboard. They then issued blue wheelie bins for all paper, plastic, glass and tins recycling and finally brown bins (and kitchen caddies) for organic recycling. There have been 3 bins collected for at least the last 3 years (and I suspect slightly longer) - on the same cycle as now - brown every week, with green and blue alternating. [Out of interest the same gang collects the brown every week, with a second gang taking the blue/ green bins alternatively]. Although the collection methods are different I think the same philosophy also operated for collections from large blocks - although 'individual' wheelie bins weren't issued there.

This morning (Tuesday 10th) in Underhill the tree collection seemed very organised and went smoothly. This was our first collection after 12th Night, when I suspect the bulk of trees would have been taken down. So Veolia/ The Council has got this right (for us, at least).

I assumed they must have some way of telling! Silver and gold are very often marked - you need to research the marks. UK silver and gold will always be marked. Most continental gold (and silver often) will have some type of marking, such as 18, 14, 9 which will tell you something about them. Jewellers will also know. A touchstone will tell then quickly whether the item is gold or not, for instance.

All I did was google Scrap metal SE London. Googling scrap (melt) silver prices gets me:- http://www.gold-traders.co.uk/scrap-silver-prices.asp where you can also input gold weights. Remember that you will need to know what carat (purity) your gold and silver are. https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=gold+silver+melt+prices&oq=Silver+melt+prices&aqs=chrome.4.69i57j0l5.11463j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Don't be too keen to 'knock' bird poo - it may drop from the heavens, but with it comes wild flower etc. seeds, so it is a positive contribution to our environment, unlike other mammalian contributions (I am not going into flying reptile poo benefits).

A quick skim read of December suggests only two felling locations in Dulwich, the remainder seem to be pollarding, tree stump grinding etc. Which would suggest that if there have actually been 'a spate' of mature trees recently (last month) felled this isn't in the schedule of works. Perhaps the OP might see if it is possible to match recently felled trees with this schedule. Emergency work (to deal with newly identified diseased trees) wouldn't necessarily be in this schedule anyway. Removing diseased trees at this time of year (if that is what is happening) may protect uninfected trees more effectively.

A multitude of solutions here:- https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=scrap+metal+SE+London&oq=scrap+metal+SE+London&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.9632j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#dlnr=1

There is a real problem with a Plane Tree disease (Massaria) which may be being addressed by the council http://www.forestry.gov.uk/forestry/beeh-9sqfb4 - does anyone know what type of tree is being removed? Additionally other sycamores can be effected by anthracnose https://www.rhs.org.uk/Advice/Profile?PID=694. Perhaps any councillor reading this could throw more light on the council's actions here?

What evidence do you have that there is a "cat killer" around who also kills foxes? Try reading the forum. Quite a lot of evidence - for cats and foxes. These may well be either trapped or take poisoned bait. The details are not, I think, made public. http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,1636757

Jubilee to Canada Water then Overground to Peckham/Denmark Hill (depending what side of town you are) Or to Brockley, Honor Oak & Forest Hill - if you are to the east of E. Dulwich. Forest Hill then gives you the 185/ 176 back into the heart of ED.

but think about all the years of natural resources that went into growing those trees, Natural resources like CO2, which is now trapped in the trees and will be released very slowly as mulch. As long as you don't burn trees then there are significant benefits to using them as CO2 traps if you believe in that sort of thing. They also provide things like an income to foresters and intermediaries, making use of land which is not ideal for other sorts of crop. Apart from relatively poor quality land the resources used are water (which is not lost) and CO2, which is trapped for a time. The price we pay for Christmas Trees is well over the cost of the usable timber grown, so benefits the growers and retailers. You need to think of whole life costs and whole life benefits, across the value chain here. On that basis Christmas trees are very much a good thing. (And our parks get chippings at only process costs, the raw material is otherwise free to them).

Dogs bark for multiple reasons, I recall one nervous one that used to go berserk at a leaf falling, let alone anything like a door bell. Others are very territorial - barking at anything they see encroaching on 'their' space, including birds. Certainly some do bark because they are distressed/ locked out etc. but those aren't the only reasons. [And some do bark if they are lonely, but other than putting them down or giving them away there may be little that can be done about that, if you are working, unless you can afford to pay for someone to look after them when you are out of the house]. Some just seem to like the sound of their own voices... If a neighbour to this dog (who knows it and its family) doesn't think there is a 'cruelty' problem then I suspect that there isn't. The sound will still be annoying, of course, but while keeping dogs is till legal (where there is no cruelty involved) that's just something you may have to live with.

We bought our house nearly 30 years (Underhill) ago with some slight evidence of (even then, old) cracking - over time that has, if anything, closed, and certainly we have had no visible worsening over this time. It was suggested that movement might anyway have been caused by the putative removal of a tree in our front garden, rather than any underlying instability. As the ground is clay there is always some risk of movement, which insurers like to play up, but, in, as I say, nearly 30 years I have seen few houses locally going through any remedial work linked to subsidence, and some of that was probably unnecessary (there was a fashion for that sort of thing a whilest back). Of course houses with newly dug basements and sub-basements have needed foundation work, but that is a function of the 'improvement' not of subsidence. We have never had buildings insurance refused (or a very high charge set) and have not, in nearly 30 years, had to make any call on it.

I am not a structural engineer, but I believe that an RSJ resting on a structural wall displaces the weight of the structure it supports throughout the supporting wall (and not just down through a notional column of bricks just below it). If the 'left' column of bricks is tied into the party wall (as it should be) then the weight being supported by the RSJ will still be displaced into the party wall. I think you would need to build-in an independent supporting column (probably steel) to support the RSJ, itself properly based and fixed. This would be non-trivial work. You would still have building works which were very close to the party wall, and which might still require a party-wall agreement.

However note that the surveyor(s) will need access to their property to undertake a proper survey (and note the pre-work condition of their property) - without that they could claim that any existing damage was down to you and you would be unable to readily disprove that (as you could with a survey of their property).

Checking some simple facts before telling someone that their email suggesting re-planting of trees in Winter is 'inappropriate' might be an idea! Tree planting seasons differ for plants with a potted root ball or bare rooted. In general most horticulturists would avoid planting bare rooted trees at times when the ground is either likely to be frozen or flooded - so planting takes place often in late autumn or early spring - certainly between November and March but not at any time or condition in that time-spread. One expert advises:- The don?t?s ? Never plant when the soil is waterlogged or frost is on the ground as buried ice stays frozen for months and slows root establishment. If you need to plant when cold weather is forecast, cover the area with cardboard or plastic sheets to keep out the cold.(http://www.telegraph.co.uk/gardening/9689949/A-guide-to-planting-bare-root-trees-shrubs-and-perennials.html) Street planted trees are always under some stress. Planting them in winter conditions will stress them further and be a poor investment. What I would do in my garden (where I can protect the trees, and where I can ensure that the roots neither dry-out or drown or freeze) is very different from what the council can do with street planted trees. Better would be to plant them as potted plants (already in soil and established) - which can be done outside the November-March window.

A 'party wall' agreement isn't really just about the party wall - it reflects the impact that building work could potentially have on a neighbour with whom you share any structure - semi or terraced. Other than building a fully structural wall (with proper foundations) within your own property to substitute the party wall and act as support to an RSJ (which would be loony) I can't see a way round this. Your neighbour cannot stop you doing work which doesn't require planning permission (which is entirely different either from meeting building regulations or permitted development) - but he/ she can require you to undertake a proper survey of their property (with a surveyor or structural engineer they agree to) - at your expense - and require you or your builder to put right any subsequent (and consequent) damage. You may need a solicitor to explain to them their legal position (which is that they don't have one when it comes to stopping your work, but that they have rights regarding that work) - which will be more expense.

If you are going to cut down trees, then now (when no birds are nesting, even if many will be roosting in trees) is ideal. They are also without leaves (deciduous ones) which makes it easier, safer and cleaner to remove them. The cost of professional removal of trees is not cheap - if they could have been left in situ that would be a cheaper option for the council, so I suspect there will be good reasons to remove them (disease, old age leading to instability, unacceptable root or canopy encroachments etc.) Of course they should be replaced (by perhaps more appropriate trees for the site, preferably ones which encourage native bird and insect species), but either autumn or spring is a better time (certainly not when the ground is likely to be frozen). As long as none have been removed because of complaints that 4WD buggies can't negotiate passed them, I am easy about this.

Best just to pretend the Southern trains don't exist, and find another route. The problem is, this just means they've won. They don't get your fare anyway - the government gets that and then has to pay compensation for failed services (probably the worst deal with train operators ever) - so if we don't even try to use them, then they can claim there are no passenger problems (because they have no passengers) - they won't be bothered to run any sort of service on our lines, but they still have the overall lucrative franchise, but without having to supply services to one part of it (which means that they will be more able to service others). The have been trading off services on our lines anyway (by massively reducing them) to keep up services on others - if they can get away with no services on ours (because we stop using them) they can argue our services aren't needed.

I've just talked to the gang on the 'brown' lorry - there are 'safe handling' issues with trees over 5ft - they have been told not to bin those, indeed any trees - and they thought that the caged lorries might be doing the collections (but didn't know for sure). I'd cut my tree back to a bare stem (with the branches in the brown bin) and they took this, and the stem.

The guys on the brown bins were told today not to collect Christmas Trees, so don't be surprised if you have left yours out and it stays. He couldn't tell me what, if any, collection method was envisaged. It was brown bin collection in recent years but I do recall them using the caged lorries some years ago on tree only collections.

There are laser lights projected from the Shard over the Christmas period, they reflect off the cloud cover - they swing round in a circle pointing out from the top of the Shard. That may be what you are seeing.

VI flying (buzz) bombs could be intercepted (the RAF got quite good at tipping them up and over-balancing them as well as shooting them down) - it was the V2 (super-sonic ballistic missiles) that could not be intercepted and which could be better targeted (they were too fast and heavy to be influenced by the weather). They also carried a much larger payload and diverting them through misinformation was the only defence available.