Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Come off it. Parking is a blatant cash cow, and 9/10 it's not even inconsiderate parking, it's the person who's overstayed by 5 minutes and been landed a ticket. I would also argue that, a go to see destination such as Dulwich Village with its gallery, parks and restaurants would earn far more from visitors spending time and money there than people being scared off because of the thought of getting a ticket.


Louisa.

So to clarify alice, a 'blow-in' (for the umteenth time) contributes to rising house prices and the knock on effect of forcing people out of the area who were born here. 'Drive-ins', tend to be the types who contribute to the local small economy by spending money in businesses often owned by locals and employing locals. Slightly off comparison that doesn't really need explaining, kind of obvious.


Louisa.

In this case though, it is inconsiderate parking. There are cones out to stop people parking along the middle of that stretch of road. If you are then daft enough to park there - making it harder for those who legitimately parked at the sides to manoeuvre - then you can't really complain about being ticketed. It's a pity they don't re-open the Grove's car park for the summer months to act as a useful overflow car park for Dulwich Park and the Horniman. Would take the pressure off local residential roads - it's amazing how many motorists 'forget' not to park across driveways on sunny weekends.

Louisa, what if the 'Drive-ins' have driven in from Clapham or the Home Counties. And are happy to spend ?6 on a loaf of organic, artisan bread while here for the day, thus supporting businesses which attract 'blow-ins'?


So can they only 'drive-in' from places you cant 'blow-in' from?

taper Wrote:

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

> They have dogs, go round clockwise and don't do picnics.


When I was training for the London Marathon last year I always ran round anti-clockwise...


To have gone clockwise would have just felt wrong.


(I am local)

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

    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
    • Very sorry to hear this, but surely the landlord is responsible for fixing the electrics?  Surely they must be insured for things like this? I hope you get it all sorted out quickly.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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