Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Evolverx8 Wrote:

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

> Dulwich Estate said no to a McD's but I agree

> better than a pub which was rubbish in modern day

> standards and the buildings a crap one so it

> should come down.


And yet they'd rather have a derelict pub than a fast food outlet.


McDonalds on Westhorne Avenue I believe uses a former pub.


I was told both McD's and Tesco have expressed serious interest in the site in the past but were turned down flat by the Dulwich Estate - by a neighbour but one who is very up on local happenings (we live close to the Grove) - and the current plan is residential with some small retail.
Leaving the building effectively derelict (even if 'boarded-up' with sheet steel) will make the case for complete demolition simpler. Its position (with garden and parking) and near a school with a boarding house and thus parents visiting who weren't local could well have made it a viable 'pub with rooms' - for longer-term visitors to Dulwich (the route the Dog is taking) - although the worry was that the estate (where its drop-in punters in the old days came from) would have given the wrong tone to a more up-market establishment. But I do feel its very sad to see the 'big' local pubs ruined or closed - most in the Dulwich Estate portfolio.

Jeremy Wrote:

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

> If it's a McD's, I'm going to be sent out every

> Saturday morning for a McSausage Muffin + hash

> brown run. Let's hope it doesn't happen.



Why would you be sent there when you live a 5 minute walk from a Maccas?

Jah Lush Wrote:

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

> It won't be a McDonalds. If it does I will

> personally burn it to the ground.



Haha, you're the main reason I'd love it to become a McDonald's. The thought of your sheer horror and disgust makes me chuckle.

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi EdButler,

TfL say they have final draft plans ready to proceed with WHEN the land/money is provided by any new development there.

The plans involve taking some of the existing land, widening the road a little to enable a new traffic island in the middle so the crossing on that western arm would be a two-stage pedestrian crossing. Or at least that's what they're proposing.


My hunch would be 2-4 years time.


We could seek to pseed this up by agreeing with the Dulwich Estate and getting some devlovled TfL funding from LIP but I doubt the administration or officers would be keen to take this approach - it would be swapping speed <12months for circa ?50,000 of TfL Southwark would never see in the future.

But I can ask.

It seems really wrong to me that TFL can not do something for people's safety if they have responsibility for it. Why should the developer chip in, they don't own the road?


And why is it down to TFL as opposed to Southwark highways? I've never quite gotten my head around who is responsible for what.

If it's to be a MacD's, with all the associated litter, carmageddon hell, obesity, the destruction of a nice old building, the loss of a pub, garish neon lighting and apple pies that burn the roof of your mouth, as far as I'm concerned they can pay for attendants to give us piggy backs over the road

Hi Otta,

I agree. But the south circular is a TfL road and so they are the highway authority for this junction.


Relinquishing some of the land for a wider road allowing a pedestrian island other than via a Compulsory Purchase Order will need the cooperation of the Dulwich Estate as freeholder and the leaseholder.

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

    • If anyone is going to the meetings above, you may wish to raise the issue of the impact of the lights, noise & activity on the local bat population. Gala commissioned a survey on bat activity, which stated that activity had been identified, with several species detected, and that action must be taken to minimise any disturbance to these legally protected species. One of the recommendations was "to limit artificial lighting and reduce noise levels starting at least 20 minutes before sunset throughout the event period"  I asked the Events Team three months ago whether this recommendation had been implemented. I finally got an answer yesterday - "This recommendation was not achievable due to the nature of the event... it was concluded that not implementing this recommendation would have little impact"  So there you have it. Commission a survey (box ticked) and then don't adhere to the findings because it's "not achievable", thereby wilfully and knowingly negatively affecting the foraging & commuting habits of a legally protected wildlife species. This is on top of the useless bird survey, which only takes into account activity within the walls of the site, not the surrounding area which is full of trees with nesting birds which are undoubtedly disturbed by a month of noise, lights & activity.
    • Really good service. Good bread. And very accommodating when we had to outwit our clever resident fox. 
    • ...and so, 4 years on from the "dramatic planning meeting" that approved the "meganursery", how has it all worked out in reality? The building looks nice from the outside - but I don't know anything more. Did either of the nursery businesses on EDG fail because there was no demand for nursery places in East Dulwich? Did Carmageddon on East Dulwich Grove get worse? Were pre-COVID work patterns abandoned forever (lol)? Were some of the concerns expressed in opposition to the planning application a teensy bit overblown...? https://southwarknews.co.uk/area/southwark/mega-nursery-approved-amid-dramatic-planning-meeting/
    • If I don’t feed the birds, they’ve actually come and perched on the fence and stared directly at me through the window. The squirrels do that too.   
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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