Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I would turn it into a green space.

Having Dulwich Park nearby is not an excuse.

Why should residents of Dulwich Village, having Dulwich Junction closed, turned into "piazza" and refurbished multiple times (no end to this btw cause Southwark council apparently has millions to waste) use it as an excuse? 

People living in the area have to put up with a very high level of:

- Air pollution

- Noise

- Anti social behaviour

How about transferring the skate park from the Grove Tavern parking  lot to Dulwich Village?

Kind of idea how to sort the derelict Tavern 🙂

Edited by ab29
2 hours ago, Dean Connell said:

I started a new topic and would love to see you all pop over to help me- I think some excellent ideas are here. I'm keen to get in touch with the lease owners. 

 

Can you share your ideas for the site, please? So the residents can have an idea of what your ideas/plans consist of.

  • Thanks 1
2 hours ago, ab29 said:

I would turn it into a green space.

Having Dulwich Park nearby is not an excuse.

Why should residents of Dulwich Village, having Dulwich Junction closed, turned into "piazza" and refurbished multiple times (no end to this btw cause Southwark council apparently has millions to waste) use it as an excuse? 

People living in the area have to put up with very high level of:

- Air pollution

- Noise

- Anti social behaviour

How about transferring the skate park from the Grove Tavern parking  lot to Dulwich Village?

Kind of idea how to sort the derelict Tavern 🙂

Not many people live in the immediate area and it's been polluted for decades - less so now cars are cleaner.  Not that it is good to live next to a busy road but anyone buying or renting in the area will be well aware 

A word of advice - laying into Southwark ie making negative comments will distract from positive suggestions.

Me?  I'd like the Grove tavern to be a community space and,/or social housing.

  • Like 1

"Not many people live in the imediate area" - eh?? Me!

"Been polluted for decades" - so we do what - we should die and stop being a problem?

1 hour ago, malumbu said:

Not many people live in the immediate area and it's been polluted for decades - less so now cars are cleaner.  Not that it is good to live next to a busy road but anyone buying or renting in the area will be well aware 

A word of advice - laying into Southwark ie making negative comments will distract from positive suggestions.

Me?  I'd like the Grove tavern to be a community space and,/or social housing.

 

Edited by Administrator
Removed uncalled for insult against forum member - warning given

Depends on who can afford to purchase or lease it and what The Dulwich Estate, Stonegate and Southwark Council will allow to be built or operate on the site. Whatever it is, it needs to attract footfall for itself and businesses around it.

The question to ask is what does that part of Dulwich need, that is not within the locality, which will attract custom and footfall, that the site can accommodate and that can offer parking which it already has available. In between Cox's Walk, Dulwich Village, Dulwich College and the park, some sort of establishment that sells drinks and meals. Bit then I'm just chucking ideas around, or maybe someone, Dean, has some radical idea's to take it in a totally different direction.   

Whatever it becomes it has to be better than the rotting site and eyesore it currently is. Good luck to anyone who takes on the project to redevelop the former Grove Tavern. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Southwark is closing youth centres day centres they’re not going to spend millions on opening a new community space. What that area needs is a good supermarket. The nearest one is Sainsbury’s in Forest Hill. someone else may well know of the mechanism where a council can make a compulsory purchase. So the supermarket underneath with three or four stories of social housing long top built in the same style as the Dulwich estate.Next door. 

Edited by alice
Spelling
  • Like 1
22 hours ago, malumbu said:

Not many people live in the immediate area and it's been polluted for decades - less so now cars are cleaner.  Not that it is good to live next to a busy road but anyone buying or renting in the area will be well aware 

A word of advice - laying into Southwark ie making negative comments will distract from positive suggestions.

Me?  I'd like the Grove tavern to be a community space and,/or social housing.

But there are loads of flats next to it, and loads of houses opposite it?

What would you call " not many people"?

  • Agree 1

Not sure why air quality came into discussion on this thread.  There are a few houses on the opposite side of the road closish to the South Circ (they all have longish front gardens).  The low level blocks of flats are set a fair way from the roads (LL and Dulwich Common).  A few other houses are on the opposite side of the road going towards Forest Hill.  It's not a densely populated area.  As said, pollutant emissions from motor vehicles have reduced due to tougher standards, for nitrogen oxides particularly since the VW cheating scandal with test procedures now far closer to the real world and can no longer be got round. The Mayor should also be congratulated for extending the ULEZ.  People tend to think about the outer boroughs, but previously the boundary was within the North and South Circs so any old vehicle could use these roads.

Anyway, just pointing out.  Not that material to  the Grove Tavern thread.  You could have similar concerns about air pollution for any place on the south Circ including parks, and other recreational facilities which can be found along Dulwich common.

Edited by malumbu

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

    • The main problem Post Offices have, IMO, is they are generally a sub optimal experience and don't really deliver services in the way people  want or need these days. I always dread having to use one as you know it will be time consuming and annoying. 
    • If you want to look for blame, look at McKinsey's. It was their model of separating cost and profit centres which started the restructuring of the Post Office - once BT was fully separated off - into Lines of Business - Parcels; Mail Delivery and Retail outlets (set aside the whole Giro Bank nonsense). Once you separate out these lines of business and make them 'stand-alone' you immediately make them vulnerable to sell off and additionally, by separating the 'businesses' make each stand or fall on their own, without cross subsidy. The Post Office took on banking and some government outsourced activity - selling licences and passports etc. as  additional revenue streams to cross subsidize the postal services, and to offer an incentive to outsourced sub post offices. As a single 'comms' delivery business the Post Office (which included the telcom business) made financial sense. Start separating elements off and it doesn't. Getting rid of 'non profitable' activity makes sense in a purely commercial environment, but not in one which is also about overall national benefit - where having an affordable and effective communications (in its largest sense) business is to the national benefit. Of course, the fact the the Government treated the highly profitable telecoms business as a cash cow (BT had a negative PSBR - public sector borrowing requirement - which meant far from the public purse funding investment in infrastructure BT had to lend the government money every year from it's operating surplus) meant that services were terrible and the improvement following privatisation was simply the effect of BT now being able to invest in infrastructure - which is why (partly) its service quality soared in the years following privatisation. I was working for BT through this period and saw what was happening there.
    • But didn't that separation begin with New Labour and Peter Mandelson?
    • I am not disputing that the Post Office remains publicly owned. But the Lib Dems’ decision to separate and privatise Royal Mail has fatally undermined the PO.  It is within the power of the Labour government to save what is left of the PO and the service it provides to the community, if they care enough; I suspect they do not.  However, the appalling postal service is a constant reminder of the Lib Dems’ duplicity on this matter. It is actions taken under the Lib Dem / Conservative coalition that have brought us to this point.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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