Penguin68

For that matter don't forget Si Mangia in Forest Hill Road, still a great 'old style' family Italian.

I am wholly happy that young people use/ read/ contribute to this forum. A lot of the time we pontificate about issues (such as schools, playgrounds etc. etc.) of more direct relevance to them than to the older contributors - it would be good to get their take on some of these things. Admin makes sure (and thanks for that) there is nothing inappropriate (I mean really inappropriate) posted here. As to the whole 'gypsy' issue - there is clearly (look at the fashion pages) a style of clothing which is categorised as 'gypsy' - although it is really an interpretation of eastern european folk clothing - so it would be quite easy to translate 'wearing clothes of eastern european peasant tendancies' into 'gypsy' - even though the wearer may not be any form of traveller, and certainly not Romany. Someone wearing Jamaican colours and with dreadlocks may be short-handed into 'Rastafarian' - without in fact and actually being one. Descriptive short-hands are both quite valuable, as quick and easily understood descriptors, but can be mis-read into appearing dismissive or racist. Someone who has just lost (to whatever cause) a highly valued possession could perhaps be cut a little slack by the thought police here.

I had rather thought that was a significant trigger for redoing the road layout. Safety.

It's a shame there's no room for a footbridge - the amortised savings on specialist crossing help would probably pay for it in a decade or so. Then lights and road lay-out would only be an issue for wheeled vehicles.

I don't know why the council can't make simple adjustments without spending a fortune on a total and unnecessary redesign. Possibly because they are rather more anti-car than (even) pro-cyclist. Most of the improvements (cf Northcross Road:LL) seem more about making life more difficult for motorists than achieving any positive direct end for the constituency purporting to be the beneficiary. Those who are politically either supporting (or directing) the council apparatchiks should note that motorists themselves form not just another constituency, but constituents.

maybe more suitable for a school/nursery/park than street planting? There is a mature silver birch growing in a (narrow) front garden in Underhill Road just north of Dunstans road on the right as you drive towards Barry - it seems to be doing quite well and would give an idea as to what a street planting would look like. I think it would work, unless greater arboreal experts than I know better (shallow rooting and drought may be an issue). However they are probably most pretty planted in stands together - so that would suggest a nursery/ park location.

Silver birch have the merit that they are shallow rooted (which reduces the amount of damage they could do) and that they do not grow too large (girth) - disadvantages are that they are drought delicate (shallow roots mean that they cannot burrow deep for water) so may need care in the summer, and that they have a life-span of no more than 80-90 years, and can be less. They are also not suitable for pollarding (if anything, they are coppice trees - an entirely inappropriate management system for a street scape). However they have, as indicated, a number of merits, not least that their canopies are more sparse than e.g. London Plane trees, so are less likely to plunge adjacent windows into gloom. And they are, or can be, very pretty.

Or maybe the constant wrangling over and repetition of the event in a thread? If all news was suppressed in case of the upset it might cause, we'd know precious little about anything. Sometimes (and I am making no speculation about the particular case in hand) the reporting of a sad event, and ensuing discussion, allows actions to be taken which might avert a repetition. The overall benefit to be gained from this (Jeremy Bentham lives yet) may outweigh the particular pain of a few individuals, if they are even aware of the commentary taking place.

Clearly roads need to be salted, and equally clearly, when this is required, it is during a dormant season when water is not so readily being taken up or needed by trees - couldn't the council protect the areas round trees adjacent to frequently salted roads - say from beginning December to end January - sacking or plastic would do, pegged into the ground, which would then keep most of the salt away from the trees? In this way elves helping the trees wouldn't have to work so hard or so desparately - and presumably the cost of so doing would readily be offset by the savings of not having to fell/ replace dead trees. Maybe it could be done at the same time as the tawdry Christmas decorations in e.g. LL were being installed, when street operatives were already out and about?

They are on the link

I think there is a clear difference between 'interest' and 'prurient interest'. The facts (a man found hanged locally) are of interest - helping explain police presence etc. etc. (and very possibly scotching other rumours). Information (which we haven't had) about name, address, intimate details of the event, speculation as to cause etc. etc. are prurient interest - passing anonymous references on this forum are going to be pretty low amongst 'grief triggers' for those left behind to mourn, as has already been noted.

Or is this just about making car ownership and use in ED increasingly difficult, as part of the unstated war on cars being waged in the borough (still no resolution or clarification of the double yellows on dropped kerbs, I note)?

James I wrote:- Even where there is a tree preservation order this can be over-ruled (with agreement from the council Tree Officer - or whatever title is held) where there is risk due to disease or damage, or where the tree is causing or believed to be causing structural damage to property - we still put (thank goodness) housing ahead of trees. You wrote:- Chatting with the new owners they had specific unequivocal surveoyr advice to remove it to stop the cracks in their front wall getting longer and wider. Without chopoing it down no house insurance and then no mortgage. You introduced this by saying, of my post Hi P68, I don't think this applies. Huh?? I had specifically noted that structural damage was a case where, even had there been a tree preservation order, this would have been (properly) over-ruled. As was/ would have been the case here - which had already been made clear earlier in this thread. I was responding to the comment about 'it should have been listed' pointing out that even had it been, that would not have saved it. The threads on Hindemans road had noted that gardens had been cleared of trees in advance of planning permission being granted/ sought - which was the point of my second para final sentance. The 'automatic' preserving of trees (meeting certain criteria) is still, to my mind, a good idea, given the caveats I started with, that where the tree was damaged or diseased, and hence a risk, or where it was already damaging property, such preservation orders could be over-ruled at the advice of council experts.

Even where there is a tree preservation order this can be over-ruled (with agreement from the council Tree Officer - or whatever title is held) where there is risk due to disease or damage, or where the tree is causing or believed to be causing structural damage to property - we still put (thank goodness) housing ahead of trees. Some councils 'automatically' put tree preservation orders on the basis of some criteria (commonly, girth) on all trees in their area (or in some specific sub-area) - requiring council permission to fell them. This stops developers clearing land in advance of submitting, or gaining, planning permission for new builds. Could have been helpful locally, reading some recent threads.

Well, a word of warning, Mustard. If previous years in ED are anything to go by, you should be anticipating desultory firework parties between now until (well) after the New Year. And most of these will be for adults, with adult bed-times in mind.

No attachment

Monkey puzzles are extremely slow growing, or at least very slow to get going - for a (very) long time this will probably not have seemed a problem. Although large trees can be moved, the size of hole needed to be dug to remove the tree with sufficient roots intact is probably larger than the front garden it is in.

I would always advise having accounts with at least 2 e-mail providers (g-mail is a good second account, where it's not your first) - if your account is compromised (stolen) you do at least have another to fall back-on, and a second account allows you to mitigate the sort of problem being discussed here. Anyone with an Android phone will have (as a default) an e-mail account with google in order to use the playstore for apps.

If you use an e-mail client (like Outlook) you will need to adjust the filters both in the client and in your e-mail service - two separate programmes will be filtering junk/ spam for you (actually, SPAM is unwanted by anyone, whereas junk is in the eye of the beholder).

Can anyone with a Hotmail account confirm if they have access to a SPAM folder, and if so whether e-mails from the forum are in there? Or can anyone with a Hotmail account do what admin suggests (...can you try adding @eastdulwichforum.co.uk to your safe senders list in Hotmail,...) and see whether anything then gets through?

As someone who has (professionally) been involved in (organisational) change management, my experience is that those who embrace anything save the most gradual change (unless initiated by them!) are in a small minority. The status quo is almost always preferred to the unknown, and this is particularly true when it comes to changing the environment around you. Ideally, although many people actually like living in town, most would also like to look out of every window and just see nature. Where you have had a little view of nature, to lose that to a building, however well designed, is most frequently something not desired. When it comes to building close to you, what is being replaced has normally to be a very significant eyesore before any new building is welcomed. Change which may actually benefit a community will still be loooked at askance when it comes to your personal amenity, and this is not unreasonable. You only have one life; it's quite an ask to sacrifice it on the alter of others' well being. And you are right to consider that planning precedent set may mean that a development which may even be acceptable as a one-off would be wholly unacceptable if it became the norm.

Even where the build proposed is against your boundary, you are not obliged (I believe) to give access for any building work - so building up to a boundary may prove technically difficult if building works have to take place from the build side only. The architects work to a brief from the client (obviously desiging within what they believe are planning regulations, although these are frequently a matter of interpretation) - their willingness at least to enter into discussion is to be praised. Not infrequently clients ask for designs which the architects may feel will not meet planning acceptance, but are still obliged at least to try this out where it may be an issue of interpretation. Sometimes architects know better than planners (the famous case of a building were 'planners' required supporting pillars, but the architect, Sir Christopher Wren, who knew they weren't required structurally, built them not actually to touch the ceiling). Whilst no one likes change, a better understanding of what is planned and what the impct will actually be can sometimes alleviate those fears. Equally, architects may understand better how their plans do impact communities, by talking to them, and can adjust plans accordingly. It (almost always) pays to talk.

I do not use Hotmail, but I assume that they divert dubious e-mails to a personal SPAM folder which can be accessed by individual e-mail accounts. If e-mails are being sent to personal SPAM by Hotmail then putting the address in a safe senders list will work, but if they are being blocked entirely (not getting through the system at all, even if marked up as SPAM) then individually 'allowing' them will probably not work. As the numbers of e-mails sent out from the forum are relatively low (I would guess) these are not being blocked on the basis of excess - so possibly a Hotmail algorithm has found something to annoy it in eastdulwichforum.co.uk or possibly the IP address you use has been blacklisted for some reason (possibly a keying error). If you have a tame Hotmail account for testing you could try sending from a different IP address (log in from somewhere else) to see if it's that. (Or log in to another account from the forum IP address and see if you can send mail to a hotmail account).

Hand-reared makes sense - perhaps even trained to take food from off a hat? Certainly no signs of natural timidity and clearly comfortable with people (well, a person). I didn't actually feel (despite my words) it was a real attack - but that I was being involved in something the crow wanted to do. There was certainly contact with my head/ hat on 3 occasions, but, with that beak, it could have been much more aggressive. More Disney than Hitchcock.

I had wondered about mistaken ID - but the hat is quite a light brown, and, well, hat-like. And we did stare at each other quite a lot, so I think he/ she wasn't mistaking my hat for a fellow corvid. Or lunch. Crows (unlike rooks) can be territorial, but I wouldn't have thought a road, as such, would be deemed territory. And it 'chased' me from one end to another -so I am not sure it was defending youngsters.