Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

West Norwood

PacificOcean said:
Crystal Palace is Upper Norwood. There is no such place as Crystal Palace.

Or Crystal Place for that matter.

The confusion is understandable though given that there is a Crystal Palace Park, Crystal Palace Station, etc, and that all the various Norwoods are miles apart.

People always name places after stations ("I live in Angel", "I live in Clapham South" - don't the station staff mind?) and as a rule it really grips my shit but I'll let them off in this case. Although residents ought to know that Upper Norwood and CP are the same place...
 
Disco Squirrel said:
The shooting happened in Crystal Place in any case Upper Norwood has a lot less gun crime than other areas. I've been living there for 6 months now and find it a very quiet place to live compared to Brixton and Streatham where I have also lived. Everywhere in London has their share of crime going.

Maybe you're thinking of a different incident. The shooting I'm thinking of didn't happen in Crystal Palace (which I would associate with the "triangle" of restaurants and bars at the top of CP park - it happened on Beulah Hill (Menlo Gardens to be precise) outside my workplace, whose address is "Upper Norwood". It wasn't a huge jibe at Upper Norwood it was to illustrate exactly the point you made that everywhere in London has their share of crime going.


"Police have renewed their appeals for witnesses three months after a couple were gunned down in their Upper Norwood home.

Jordan Jackson, 20, and his girlfriend of almost five years, Leyla Djemal-Northcott, 21, were murdered when two masked gunmen stormed into their Menlo Gardens flat on March 7."
 
PacificOcean said:
Crystal Palace is Upper Norwood. There is no such place as Crystal Palace.
But when people refer to Crystal Palace (the place), they're specifically referring to the triangle - Upper Norwood has conme to be seen as the area immediately south of the White Hart and Alma pubs. It may not be official but it's how areas get their names; suburbs come about. :)

And it's absolutely nowhere near Surrey. :p ;)
 
Monkeynuts said:
Still is. Croydon is in Surrey. "Crystal Palace" is mostly in Croydon borough.

Depends which bit. I think "Crystal Palace" is unique in being on the boundries of five boroughs - Lambeth, Croydon, Bromley, Lewisham and Southwark.
 
Croydon is in surrey, which is a london borough. It's not covered by Surrey County Council, but that's a different matter. bit like middlesex cricket ground being in st johns wood! Kent traditionally went right up to southwark cathedral. Having a non london postcode (ie CR or SM) has nothing to do with it either, you're still in london AND surrey. Sutton is a London Borough, has it's own postcode, and offically is addressed Surrey. It also has 0208 phone numbering, but let's not confuse things even more.
 
Thank you. I am well aware of the dispositions of the various London Boroughs.

No doubt you will also be aware that traditionally areas of South London have fallen into either Kent (e.g. Sydenham) or Surrey (e.g. Camberwell) but that the use of the county names has fallen out of use, and that areas falling into a London Borough are considered part of Greater London.

Croydon isn't really part of London though. It's a separate town in Greater London that is traditionally in the County of Surrey. Some people in Croydon will undoubtedly still put "Croydon, Surrey" on their post.

And S of the triangle one is in Croydon.

And S of the borough is...Surrey. So you are hardly "nowhere near Surrey" seeing as it is immediately adjacent and you can therefore be no closer, though I fail to see why you have a problem with this.
 
West norwood is boss..
There is a cinema in west norwood & it opens most thursday evenings..
its got an organic food shop & it has icelands, summerfields, co-op..
A laundrete. pound shop, tinternet shop, a few west indian & carribean restraunts : sorento's (the best Cafe in london).. B&Q, weed shop Homestore. woolworths..lots of churches & quite a pleseant community of people from across the World, its very unlike most places in london, as it has no Starbucks Or Cafe nero.. Instead most places are independently run..
There are some pubs that have o.k facilities. The hope the Gypsy Queen The park... the train & bus links are great..
The only thing that lets the place down is the fact that No moneys been invested into it for time..
oh yeh there are camera's looking over the whole place too so you can feel safe...
 
Monkeynuts said:
Thank you. I am well aware of the dispositions of the various London Boroughs.

No doubt you will also be aware that traditionally areas of South London have fallen into either Kent (e.g. Sydenham) or Surrey (e.g. Camberwell) but that the use of the county names has fallen out of use, and that areas falling into a London Borough are considered part of Greater London.

Croydon isn't really part of London though. It's a separate town in Greater London that is traditionally in the County of Surrey. Some people in Croydon will undoubtedly still put "Croydon, Surrey" on their post.

And S of the triangle one is in Croydon.

And S of the borough is...Surrey. So you are hardly "nowhere near Surrey" seeing as it is immediately adjacent and you can therefore be no closer, though I fail to see why you have a problem with this.

No, it still doesn't make sense. I fail to see how you can be in two counties at the same time. Never mind the postcode boundary, geographically speaking Croydon is in Greater London - fact. Yes, it used to be in Surrey once upon a time, but has not been since the boundaries were officially altered in 1965.

If I have a problem with this at all it's perhaps a lot to do with the more snobbish Bromley and Croydon elements seeking to distance themselves from the 'rabble' by claiming to live in Kent or Surrey respectively.

And, having lived within the boundaries of Sydenham for the past five years I can assure you that it is not and never has been in any shape or form part of Kent or Surrey - it is in London.
 
acid priest said:
And, having lived within the boundaries of Sydenham for the past five years I can assure you that it is not and never has been in any shape or form part of Kent or Surrey - it is in London.

It was Kent in the 19th century.
 
You are quite correct that the boundaries were altered but you are still near Surrey. Live with it. It shouldn't be too much of an imposition.

Sydenham has been part of London for a long time but I'm afraid that you are totally wrong that "it never has been in any shape or form part of Kent or Surrey". All the home counties used to go right into what it is now the centre of the city before the city expanded in the 19th century. This is hardly surprising as there would be no reason for the city to include a load of farmland and woods miles outside the built-up area. It's a long time ago now but Sydenham was once part of Kent.
 
London only became seperate from counties when it go so big, for administration purposes. County councils exist for administration purposes. There is Surrey County Council for administation purposes. Traditionally surrey goes right up to central london (where do surrey play cricket????) it's a mess, it's all muddled now.

Let's move on....
 
oicur0t said:
London only became seperate from counties when it go so big, for administration purposes. County councils exist for administration purposes. There is Surrey County Council for administation purposes. Traditionally surrey goes right up to central london (where do surrey play cricket????) it's a mess, it's all muddled now.

Let's move on....

Don't they play at the Oval?
 
West norwood is in SE27 the borough of Lambeth.. & its great...
73b8459c57.jpg


Heres a shot of some groovy people from the south london theatre centre getting down... come and join them & forget about boarders & land disputes..:)
 
Monkeynuts said:
So what? What is this link supposed to prove other than to confirm exactly what I've been saying all along, and to further undermine your own argument? Pre-1965, what you're claiming now would, I agree, have been the facts. But that was, like, 41 YEARS ago. The boundaries have CHANGED. Get over it!

I'm not concerned with postal districts. If the Post Office decides that a CR0 postcode belongs to 'Croydon, Surrey' that's their own convoluted prerogative (probably a lot to blame for the confusion) and is strategic, depending on feasable population coverage by one postal town. However, I'm talking geographical boundaries here. Find me an atlas of the UK printed since fucking Beatlemania and show me where Middlesex is. And show me the boundary of Surrey and where Croydon is in that. You can't? Didn't think so.

Boundaries are boundaries. Borders are borders. How the fuck can they overlap? It's against their very nature! Listen up:

SURREY IS SURREY.
GUILDFORD IS IN SURREY.
KENT IS KENT.
TUNBRIDGE WELLS IS IN KENT.
GREATER LONDON IS GREATER LONDON.
CROYDON IS IN GREATER LONDON.
BROMLEY IS IN GREATER LONDON.
MIDDLESEX DOESN'T EXIST.

FACT. LIVE WITH IT.

And now, back to West Norwood. :)
 
I was in West Norwood yesterday, as it happens. It's not bad at all - much nicer than Penge. And an awesome view of the TV transmitter at Crystal Palace. :cool:
 
acid priest said:
Boundaries are boundaries. Borders are borders. How the fuck can they overlap? It's against their very nature! Listen up:

SURREY IS SURREY.
GUILDFORD IS IN SURREY.
KENT IS KENT.
TUNBRIDGE WELLS IS IN KENT.
GREATER LONDON IS GREATER LONDON.
CROYDON IS IN GREATER LONDON.
BROMLEY IS IN GREATER LONDON.
MIDDLESEX DOESN'T EXIST.

FACT. LIVE WITH IT.

I do...quite happily, everyday...but:

acid priest said:
I can assure you that it [sydenham] is not and never has been in any shape or form part of Kent or Surrey

You're the one who said Sydenham was never in Kent you ignorant fucking prick.

IT USED TO BE. LIVE WITH IT!
 
Back
Top Bottom