Jump to content

Recommended Posts

pipsky2008 Wrote:

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

> fazer71 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Umm what does it look like on the inside ?

> >

> > The outer area may look like that so the

> hardcore

> > mixed with concrete bonds better.

> >

> > But it does look a little odd...

>

> I've added a picture of the interior here, I hope

> it's visible. Thre's no mortar between some of the

> joints at all, none of it is pointed, other bricks

> are not lapped correctly. Either it doesn't matter

> or it does. I believe it does matter and not just

> aesthetically but structurally.


There are lintels in there and the bricks are laid in an English bond, so a bricky did build it. It's likely it will get rendered inside after, so no pointing is required.


Lastly, it's surrounded by concrete and won't be going anywhere.


Are you a bricky or a civil engineer ?


No, thought not.


NETTE

I am concerned about the quality of the work Southwark contracts as I live here and provide the money: randomly what I know


Peckham Pulse: construction problems for years with little attention to design for energy conservation or generation

Dulwich Leisure Centre: ditto

Fusion Website booking: not fit for purpose

Veolia: How was a contract awarded to this firm?

Southwark Parking Authority: Is there any chance that the corruption exposed this week in Chelsea operates here?


So having looked at your photo I have to say whether or not this work will be buried it looks like it isn't fit for purpose and certainly shows the worker to have no pride in their product. The edges on the Pyramids are better done.

Annette Curtain Wrote:

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

> pipsky2008 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > fazer71 Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > Umm what does it look like on the inside ?

> > >

> > > The outer area may look like that so the

> > hardcore

> > > mixed with concrete bonds better.

> > >

> > > But it does look a little odd...

> >

> > I've added a picture of the interior here, I

> hope

> > it's visible. Thre's no mortar between some of

> the

> > joints at all, none of it is pointed, other

> bricks

> > are not lapped correctly. Either it doesn't

> matter

> > or it does. I believe it does matter and not

> just

> > aesthetically but structurally.

>

> There are lintels in there and the bricks are laid

> in an English bond, so a bricky did build it. It's

> likely it will get rendered inside after, so no

> pointing is required.

>

> Lastly, it's surrounded by concrete and won't be

> going anywhere.

>

> Are you a bricky or a civil engineer ?

>

> No, thought not.

>

> NETTE


I am neither but one doesn't have to be a vet to see that a lame dog has something wrong with it's leg

Oh.

Yes it's going to struggle to cope with all those heavy buggies and lardy mummies walking over it on the pavements of Lordship Lane.

Can we have a copy of the full report from Southwark once you've got it OP ?

Just love threads like this 4 the comedy value.


http://gtalfaromeo.co.uk/IMG_0224.jpg

pipsky2008 Wrote:


> I am neither but one doesn't have to be a vet to

> see that a lame dog has something wrong with it's

> leg



Nope you are right there, "one" doesn't.


And it doesn't take a frikkin genius to see you're a classic old school "Busy Body"


Now on y'bike Trunky.


http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31ETfInX6gL._AA300_.jpg



NETTE:-S

Annette Curtain Wrote:

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

> pipsky2008 Wrote:

>

> > I am neither but one doesn't have to be a vet

> to

> > see that a lame dog has something wrong with

> it's

> > leg

>

>

> Nope your right there "one" doesn't.

>

> And it doesn't take a frikkin genius to see you're

> a classic old school "Busy Body"

>

> Now on y'bike Trunky.

>

> http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31ETfInX6gL.

> _AA300_.jpg

>

>

> NETTE:-S


It's you're not your you inadequate, illiterate,peasent

*Bob* Wrote:

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

> pipsky2008 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > It's you're not your you inadequate,

> > illiterate,peasent

>

>

> Well said.


Not really. It's peasant, not peasent.

Ah Ha


My favourite thread to date


Come on pipsky, i've squeezed you 'till you squeaked


Admit defeat. You're a green-ink-nasally-jobsworth-Busy-Body.


And you know it.


Now rub some ointment on your sore nose and sling yer hook.


NETTE:-S


What makes me laugh even more is that I posted the above and edited the error out a whole 7 minutes later. Pipsky must have seen and copied it straight away.


The joy is he sat on it all night, seething, considering his response, and that's all he could come up with.


Ah joy, he's a smaller maggot than i'd given him credit for.

Annette Curtain Wrote:

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

> What makes me laugh even more is that I posted the

> above and edited the error out a whole 7 minutes

> later. Pipsky must have seen and copied it

> straight away.


Actually, for the sake of accuracy, it's still there (I've copied it here below). You must have corrected a different one. (I agree with you about the brick work, though.)


> Nope your right there "one" doesn't.

pipsky2008 Wrote:

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

> Nette. I didn't see your posting until I saw it

> this morning but I know when I'm beaten. You win.



> I love you


Oh good. I love you too.


Ask maxxi. We fell out, then in and we're now married with children.


NETTE:)

Ridgley Wrote:

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

> Was it Morrison's that is the contracters

> Southwark Council tend to use?


The work I mentioned is being done by F.M Conway Ltd. They undertake road and paving work and were the contractor responsible for the uphill stream, another of my blithering idiot threads.

Annette Curtain Wrote:

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

> pipsky2008 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Nette. I didn't see your posting until I saw it

> > this morning but I know when I'm beaten. You

> win.

>

>

> > I love you

>

> Oh good. I love you too.

>

> Ask maxxi. We fell out, then in and we're now

> married with children.

>

> NETTE:)



...yet they are still b*st*rds every one.

pipsky2008 Wrote:


> The work I mentioned is being done by F.M Conway

> Ltd. They undertake road and paving work and were

> the contractor responsible for the uphill stream,

> another of my blithering idiot threads.



So there IS life after The Bill...http://images.wikia.com/thebill/images/f/fe/DerekConway_(Ch_Insp).jpg

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

    • It's the "due to commercial reasons" line again that is vexing. Last year it seemed, although there was a similar level of objection, that the reasons were commercial - Gala didn't appear entirely prepared to run 3 more events, or more likely didn't have sufficient interest from other promoters / organisers who could 'sub-let' the site as with Brockwell Park (I believe?). This year they appeared more organised, had another year to plan & prepare, to the extent they actually had names for two of the three new events which indicated to me that they had third party promoters / organisers in place.  So yes, it does make you wonder whether the repeated level of objection, combined with the impending elections, led to the council 'advising' that maybe they shelve it again? I'm afraid I can't see the whole extension application just being a ruse to guarantee permission for the 'regular' event. Gala are a commercial venture with ambition - every festival's business plan is to expand, expand, expand, year on year on year. Gala won't give up until they have taken over the whole park for a Summer of Raves, and the mysterious owners are on their yachts counting their ££££
    • Thanks for that. Maybe forthcoming elections have stymied the 7 day request? If Labour get back in, do we think GALA will try with greater success in 2027?
    • Better late than never, same obscure reason as previously for not going ahead with the extended plan... "Due to commercial reasons, the event organisers have withdrawn their application to hold a 7- day event over two weekends. The application has been revised to request the use of Peckham Rye Park to hold a 4-day event over one bank holiday weekend with the following schedule: • Onsite: Monday 11 May 2026 • GALA: Friday 22 – Sunday 24 May • On the Rye Festival: BH Monday 25 May • Off-site Sunday 31 May 2026 This is the same event programme that was delivered in 2025."  GALA 2026 consultation findings report 1519.pdf
    • Do great pizzas there at community cafe.. lots going on — was free parking but plans  to like everywhere get folk to pay.  Nice area… only discovered it a few years ago..   
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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