She'llsurvive

i appreciate not everyone is as lazy as me but i don't see what's wrong with a simple survey that says do you agree with a cpz with options "yes" / "yes if free, otherwise no thank you" / "no" / "whatever"

i appreciate the work that has gone into the survey that has now been posted as a way of getting some detailed views - but a survey that has 24 questions isn't going to be answered by anyone unless they really care (esp. since the main question isn't question number 1 but question number 15) so i don't see this being representative either

any of those dulwich lawyers out there who could help with how to call for a judicial review (or similar appeal) of this decision based on false information and seemingly a two fingers to stated government policy on increasing children's access to museums?

what happened at the meeting?

nice to see that even in the libdem-voting fashionable inner cities the massive majority are passionately against anything that might make it slightly more inconvenient to make needless short term car journeys. phew.

ouch you ran over my foot

if it wasn't obvious, it's the roads near the station that are always full, i.e. those N of ED grove. (including from the post above some of those in se15). anyone want to dispute that? (doesn't mean i support a cpz, just pointing out that the various comments that there are zero parking problems are true for many but not everyone).

"I seem to recall we were told that with the introduction of the congestion charge, East Dulwich residents would face an Armada of commuter vehicles parking all the way up LL and the side streets. Funny that it doesn?t appear to have happened?" it does happen on the streets nearest the station. melbourne/derwent/elsie are full all day every working day - you can see the lazy drivers park up at 8 and pick up the cars again at 6. why can't they just get the bus? if they live that far away they can go to forest hill or honor oak. it does only seem to be this small area that has a problem.

erm, the two people on this thread who have slagged off the playground both admit they haven't taken children there, the greater number of people who say they have taken children there seem happy with it. whose views exactly should the cllr be listening to?!

two children under five, no car, they love the train and the p13. however they don't like the 37 because it smells of poo.

in the summer the tree cover is wonderful as the children can play without overheating and getting sunburnt. in the winter it provides wind cover. there is a wooden climbing frame with fab tunnel, a large climbing frame in good condition and some rocking devices as well as swings. it's not huge, but there's also the pergola, the gardens and the lake for running around. ive' been going for over 16 months and i've never felt scared. then again i am from east dulwich and i have my liberal convictions to protect me.

well it does suggest giving people free rein to let houses with a bit of land go to rack and ruin on the basis that it will allow them to get planning permission to knock them down and put up flats with greater quick buck potential (and helping southwark council increase housing stock). as long as it's only happening occasionally i agree it's probably best to let them get on with it. it is on the main road where there are plenty of other low-rise flats. plus given that the pct did the same at dulwich hospital a few doors down, there is some obvious precedent.

apparently it has been like that for seven years, and they have tried several times to get planning permission to knock it down, so far unsuccessful.

just seen this thread and am baffled. the playground in peckham rye park is one of the nicest in the area. whereas goose green has elephants that don't work and slides boarded up. even st francis' park is in better condition. sunray gardens got i think 25K from cleaner greener safer a couple of years ago which made a big difference.

When the council tried to reroute the 37 bus down derwent grove, pretty much everyone from the street responded to the consultation and turned up to the community council meeting. Not sure whether this helped but they dropped the plans.