-
-
Latest Discussions
-
By Graham Little · Posted
I agree its good to have a conversation about what Lordship lane really needs and I feel we are doing that in this forum; and some trying to steer it away from what commerce needs (lordship lane) and toward what people need, particularly our future generations who are being left a fractured future and are responding with higher suicide rates and depression. no doubt the world of profit will win, but that is why some of us wish to speak out even if in vain. I agree with you that there may be some underage drink drugs but would we all prefer that to be done behind closed doors .... I think more dangerous actually. I applaud your optimism that dulwich estates could consider a skatepark into Dulwich park, maybe, although it could have closing time, insurance, safety issues. It would be great if a developer wants to include a skatepark, but I wonder what he would gain from that in terms of his profit. I would rather give the benefit of doubt to those who leave behind the empty digital world and bravely try something communal, generative, challenging. In the 1970s a tv programme urged teenagers to "turn off your TV set and do something less boring instead" only some families can afford clubs...... -
Just gone passed Love Dulwich cafe on the bus and there’s a sign outside stating “new Turkish restaurant opening soon” - I know the owners are Turkish but are they converting it already? -
I was surprised to learn that East Dulwich Picturehouse now only screens PG-rated films for their baby-friendly showings, unlike other Picturehouse branches. Apparently, this change happened after a complaint to the council about showing films above a PG rating to infants. Afaik, this policy only applies to this branch. As a local parent, I find this frustrating. It limits our options, especially when many of us would love the chance to watch a wider range of films while caring for our little ones. For example, during Oscar Week, only one vintage film is being shown. Are we really expected to only consume toddler-focused content, like Cocomelon? I also worry about the precedent this sets. If other institutions, like the Tate or the National Portrait Gallery, applied similar restrictions, parents could be left with only child-oriented content. Babies under one don’t fully comprehend adult themes, so shouldn’t there be more flexibility? I’d love to hear what others think—should this policy be reconsidered? -
By YazzieSE22 · Posted
I am a secondary teacher in the local area and totally agree that it’s so important for teenagers to be given a space to connect and learn skills. I think it’s lovely that they’ve been able to do this organically due to the carpark being derelict but it defeats the very concept of dynamic urban living to use this as a reason to block the development of the space into something that could benefit the whole community. I would really welcome an entrepreneur bringing a proposal forward that thinks about how we could best make the space work for everyone. I’d also love to see the council engage with the kids themselves on how and where to make the skate park permanent, perhaps in Dulwich Park itself. Give them some funding to make it nicer than a space by such a busy traffic route. I also agree we shouldn’t romanticise the skate park - they’re not principals in the Royal Ballet Company. I don’t think it’s hugely affecting the community, but let’s not pretend there isn’t some underage drinking and drug use going on there. But mainly the building itself is a waste of space and it’s often depressing to see the private security company vans parked out there late at night. Let’s use it as an opportunity to engage in conversations about what this part of Lordship Lane really needs.
-
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now