Jump to content

Recommended Posts

LadyDeliah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You said he would need an address to get benefits

> or money. I pointed out that he would not.


I said...


He would need money. ??? Would need an address to get benefits. ???


There are Question Marks.


I Don't know anything about claiming benifits.


Was simply asking Would he need money. ??? Would he need an address to get benifits ???.


Sorry for the shorthand. Too used to twitter where you only get 140 chars.


Fox.

I perosnally hope he becomes a permanent feauture if that is what he wants - will pop down and give him a food parcel at the weekend - we despartely need more eccentrics.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/oct/29/haroonsiddique


And lets hope the council treats this with sensitivity it deserves http://www.expressandstar.com/latest/2007/11/02/rats-move-into-freds-old-home/

  • 2 weeks later...

I manage Sydenham Hill Wood on behalf of London Wildlife Trust.

My attention was brought to this thread and I felt I should repond to some of your questions.


This is the third year in a row that the man you refer to in this thread has been sleeping in Sydenham Hill Wood. Although we would not encourage people to camp in the wood we have no intention of asking him to move on. The man, and where he camps, is known to Southwark's Spot at St Mungos and it is my understanding that he chooses to sleep in the wood.


I can confirm that there has been a sad incident in the wood, but to my knowledge this is unrelated to the man camping. I cannot provide any more information on this and ask if people can please respect this persons privacy and allow the police to do their job.


Although one parcel of woodland Sydenham Hill and Dulwich Woods are under different management. London Wildlife Trust manages Sydenham Hill Wood, which is a nature reserve, and the Dulwich Estate manages Dulwich Wood, which is a private wood. There are maps at the entrances to Sydenham Hill Wood and the boundary between the two is marked by green posts. To complicate things Beechgrove, the section of the wood seen from Sydenham Hill with chain fencing, missing fencing and a brick wall, is not part of Sydenham Hill Wood or managed by London Wildlife Trust, but managed by the Dulwich Estate.


So in answer to the-e-dealer:

Two of the trees that have come down on Sydenham Hill in recent years have been from Beechgrove and one from Sydenham Hill Wood during the recent high winds(although this only blocked the pavement for a matter of hours). The Council are responsible for major treeworks in Sydenham Hill Wood (but not Beechgrove or Dulwich Wood). I advised them the next morning and they cleared it the same afternoon. Please understand that whilst trees are regularly inspected for safety they will come down from time to time. If trees fall within the wood, as long as they are not blocking any main paths or causing hazards, it is our policy to leave them where they fall.


Best wishes,


(Ms)Ashley White

Conservation Projects Officer

London Wildlife Trust

[email protected]

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Yes it could be a massive improvement and useful to hear that contracts have finally been awarded. I totally understand though why doubts are expressed about when the new square will open. This 2012 BBC article about mayoral funding after the London 2011 riots says "In Southwark, which saw parts of Peckham hit by the rioters, there are plans to redevelop Peckham Rye station". https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-19167948 A decade later, the first phase on Blenheim Grove - the white buildings with the new roof deck - was kind of completed by summer 2022. Yet three years on those buildings are still covered with hoardings, gathering ever more graffiti. There has been no clear or coherent explanation from Southwark why, just some excuses of water ingress. How much rent must have been lost in that time and who has taken the resultant financial hit? In that context is it unreasonable to doubt that the new square will be fully opened next year - rather we'll get a fenced in walkway leading through an 80% completed square that we're forced to squeeze through for years to come? Dare I also remind people that the reality of what was built on Blenheim Grove didn't look as good as the renders. With construction inflation recently so high, it's valid to ask how the resultant funding gap for the main phases of this scheme will be bridged. It's not just Southwark's inability to manage major projects that are a concern but also its senior leadership's reluctance to be transparent about problems let alone make any visible efforts to tackle them.
    • Camberwell Old Cemetery weren't this morning, oddly out with strimmers near the meadow area;,but.... It's generally a haven for wildlife so can be forgiven 😊
    • "im good with .....". Good as an adjective not adverb
    • My recollection is initially it was a corner of the pub rather than a room. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...