benmorg

Another option is train to London Bridge, then tube to Moorgate, then walk to Liverpool St.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > People are talking about rail and tube links > instead, but isn't the whole point of a tram is > that it's vastly cheaper to build? ?55m sounds > like a lot, but it's peanuts compared to the cost > of tunneling out a tube extension. > > I think the tram's a good idea in theory, but it > would make the recent narrowing of Walworth road > seem rather shorted sighted. The rail link already exists, so why would a tunnel have to be built?

Rather than axing the Denmark Bridge to London Bridge rail service and spending millions on a tram, at great inconvenience to motorists and buses, why not simply keep the rail service?

Crossing ED Grove from Melbourne Grove is pretty hair-raising - some traffic lights at this junction would help, plus a double yellow line at the EDG end of Melbourne to stop the frequent car-jams as people try to turn in and out of Melbourne Grove.

AlexC Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > aicardo Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > Add to that the fact that many buyers are after > period conversions, which are of course of limited > supply. No, demand for flats is much less strong than demand for houses outside the centre. Most of the growth in prices has been in larger houses or prime central locations. A period conversation in SE22 isn't a safe bet.

Some sellers are having to make big price drops: http://m.guardian.co.uk/media/mediamonkeyblog/2012/jul/03/andy-coulson-victim-property-slump?cat=media&type=article

bsand Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Police Crime Map April 2012 > > Nunhead - all crime 874 > East Dulwich - all crime 446 > > http://www.police.uk/crime/?q=London,%20Greater%20 > London%20SE22,%20UK#crimetypes/2012-04 > > There's a reason why Nunhead is cheaper and that's > it - you see a lot of bars and security gates > there as well. Don't those figures simply reflect denser housing and therefore higher population? If you set the map to Knightsbridge (SW1X), the crime figure goes up to 1763 - more than twice the figure for Nunhead. The crime figure is higher in Knightsbridge simply because there are more people there, not because it's a rougher neighbourhood.

James Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Gotta be honest, some of the houses in Nunhead are > lovely but much of it is quite grim. East Dulwich > it isn't. It's nice in the streets near the cemetery - large victorian terraces, much bigger than ED average with decent gardens. Limesford Road is probably the best. The ELL service at Brockley is a 10 min walk from north end of Ivydale Road. The problem with Nunhead is that there isn't much there in the way of shops, pubs & restaurants. I lived there for 7 years and enjoyed the peace but didn't go to a pub once. I didn't see any evidence of gangs and never had problems with burglars or muggers - that's worse in ED, where there are deeper pockets to pick.

Wanhope Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Thanks all for responses so far (including those > who've responded by PM). I know ED is still > relatively cheap compared with other parts of > South London such as Putney, Clapham etc., but > there has been a pronounced jump in pricing in > just the last six months and I was interested to > know what might be driving that and whether people > were indeed paying the asking prices. Sounds like > they may be, though that doesn't tally with recent > data I've looked at on sold prices in the area, > where the average is still closer to asking prices > of six months ago. So, something is amiss. > Anyway, we may now look at other areas; I'd just > been reluctant to concede that we'd been priced > out of this area, having already moved from > another for the same reason (ironically enough, > that was N16 -- see above post from mc_hall on the > madness there). One of the reasons for the jump is seasonal - the main buying season is spring to early summer, which is when most of the annual rise in average house prices happens. After end of June, the market gets quieter and prices sag. There's usually an increase in stock in april-june when new sellers come to market, but this year stock has remained very tight, pushing prices up faster than normal. There are various reasons for stock remaining tight, including rising rents encouraging landlords to hold onto portfolios and the widespread perception that London property is a safe bet. London is benefiting from flow of money from eurozone looking for safe havens, which mostly affects prime central & west areas, but the overspill also hikes prices further down the ladder to a diminishing extent, affecting good houses most and smaller flats the least. I don't think things can carry on like this without another bubble developing. Then again, if they keep printing money who knows what will happen.

related story from a year ago: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-12937483 I don't think it's the same guy as ours only drinks still water.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So 30 litres or so of urine appears all of a > sudden, arranged neatly along the curb? Surely > this blows the taxi driver theory out of the > water. There was a long gap since the last deposit - maybe he was keeping the bottles in the boot of his minicab. I'm pretty sure someone from the forum rearranged them though.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think underpinning is particularly problematic, > as it indicates that the movement has been > significant. One of the reasons premiums can remain high is that underpinning isn't necessarily a cure for subsidence. If subsidence is caused by landslip rather than heave, for example, underpinning won't make any difference. Landslip subsidence is a problems on the land under Dawson's heights and led to the demolition of much of Dunstan's Road. Some details here: http://www.dulwichsociety.com/newsletters/43-spring-2006/213-dawsons-hill-before-daswons-heights It's one of the reasons that buildings insurance premiums for SE22 are far higher than the national average.

mynamehere Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What happened in NYC is a model for how to stop > crime waves and the handful of people driving them > each time they cycle through as one is now > affecting us locally: slam people with authority > on to the streets > > NYC: > > If you compare New York in 2011 to New York in > 1990, it seems hard to believe that it?s the same > city. In the 1970s, ?80s and early ?90s, New York > was viewed as one of the world?s most dangerous > metropolises ? a cesspool of violence and danger > depicted in gritty films like ?The Warriors? and > ?Escape From New York.? Friends who lived here > during that time talk of being terrified to use > the subway, of being mugged outside their > apartments, and an overwhelming tide of junkies. > Thirty-one one of every 100,000 New Yorkers were > murdered each year, and 3,668 were victims of > larceny. > > Today, in an astonishing twist, New York is one of > the safest cities in the country. Its current > homicide rate is 18 percent of its 1990 total ? > its auto theft rate is 6 percent. The drop > exceeded the wildest dreams of crime experts of > the 1990s, and it?s a testament to this > transformation that New Yorkers now seem more > likely to complain about the city?s dullness than > about its criminality. > > In his fascinating new book, ?The City that Became > Safe,? Franklin Zimring, a professor of law and > chairman of the Criminal Justice Research Program > at the University of California at Berkeley, looks > at the real reasons behind that change ? and his > conclusions might surprise you. Contrary to > popular belief, Giuliani?s ?zero tolerance? > bluster had little to do with it. Instead, it was > a combination of strategic policing and harm > reduction by the New York Police Department. > Police targeted open-air drug markets, and went > after guns, while leaving drug users largely > alone. The implications of the strategy could make > us revise not only the way we think about crime, > but the way we think about our prison system and > even human nature. Another theory is that the legalization of abortion in the 1970s caused a significant fall in the crime rate about 18 years later, since many of the criminals-to-be were never born. The economist who came up with this idea popularized it in Freakonomics.

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Criminals would just wait outside the CCTV camera > area. CCTV is not a magic bullet or panacea. Sure they would do that if the CCTV was obvious, but I don't see why police couldn't use concealed cameras in order to catch people rather than deter them.

Loz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So, CCTV has so far not captured the actual > mugging. So how many people need to be mugged to > build up this picture to see who was acting > suspiciously? And hope it's only one person. Who > doesn't change their clothes much. Who probably > won't be charged anyway as the evidence would be > up the rigours of a court. You forget that the victim would often be able to identify the suspect caught on camera. The police would then have both a description and a picture. Better than just a description. They might even recognise a known trouble-maker. 24 hour police presence is impossible, but 24 hour cameras are easy to organise and far cheaper.

Loz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Because otherwise it doesn't protect, it just > allows you to watch the 'highlights' afterwards of > an unrecognisable person wearing a hoodie mugging > someone. Muggers might be complete barstewards, > but they're generally not stupid. The camera might not catch the mugger's face but would certainly help with building a physical description. Not sure what you mean by "highlights". Any film of the mugger hanging around or walking would potentially be useful. I doubt whether a camera at the station would film the crime as the mugger in question follows victims onto back streets before trying to rob them. Constant monitoring of the feed is impractical, but a 24 hour digital recording with time stamp would allow police to see victims being followed from the station after the crime had been reported. The presence of cameras might also act as a deterrent.

Loz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Good lord, why do people think CCTV is the answer > to these problems? Let's think this through. The > police could: > > 1) Install a CCTV camera. With the pole, the > camera, the cabling and the comms, this would take > about six months and cost rather a lot of money. > They would also have to monitor the camera, which > will either be dedicated monitoring station (more > money) or part of a wider monitoring system, which > means there would be quite a chance that anyone > being mugged wouldn't be noticed. Also, since > cameras have limited visibility, there would need > to be a number of cameras, increasing both the > cost and the probability that any mugging would be > missed. Why would someone have to monitor the live feed?

It sounds like the same person and his MO seems to be following single vulnerable victims from the train station late at night. So it should be possible for the police to catch him by installing some CCTV around the station. Surely the fact that he threatened to kill merits extra attention from the police and a bit of investment in extra surveillance. This guy deserves to be locked up for years.

George the Robot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The key issue in my mind is that the market is so > small, especially in terms of available property, > which means there are enough cash rich people out > there to sustain the market. ... I still think that most people are in a position > where they have to stay put given that it remains > very difficult to borrow money. Yes, but that's a consequence of monetary stimulus. Low mortgage rates help to keep those on the edge from selling or being repossessed, which in turn keeps supply down and supports prices. The low bank rate also makes savings accounts unattractive to investors, pushing them into riskier assets like property. Monetary stimulus also weakens sterling and therefore makes London houses cheaper to foreign buyers. So it supports house prices in several different ways besides the obvious one of making borrowing cheap. All this goes into reverse when interest rates rise, but that won't happen until inflation gets seriously out of control.

Fliss Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > No benmorg, she wasn't blaming the victim in this > case, she was just saying that people tend to > assume it's careless drivers who cause this type > of accident, whereas if fact some pedestrians are > pretty careless, too. She wasn't blaming anyone, > and she was speaking generally, not suggesting > anything about this particular case. To me she > sounds like a very careful and responsible driver > who goes in fear of having such an accident > despite her best efforts to be aware of everything > happening on the road in front of her. As the OP states, we don't even know if the child who was run over is OK - I hope he is. Given the lack of information, it would be tactful to avoid ranting about careless pedestrians being the cause of accidents.

Fliss Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don't think sweetgirl's post was tactless or > inappropriate. As a driver she spends more time > than most on the roads, and she is simply > highlighting the fact that busy city roads are > very dangerous, pedestrians aren't always aware of > what it's like for drivers of vehicles as road > users, and as a parent I couldn't agree more that > we have to train our children from a very young > age to be traffic-aware and be safe as > pedestrians. I think it's tactless to log on to an internet forum to blame the victim of a road accident about which the poster knows nothing. It's all the more tactless when the victim is a child and the parents may be readers of the forum. I nearly ran over a 3-year-old boy in East Dulwich myself recently and it wasn't anybody's fault or negligence - accidents can happen on the road at any time.

sweetgirl Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > my work involves driving, everyday i see foolish > people, adults & kids.... running out into the > roads. i see adults WITH children running into > the roads to catch a bus... its ridiculous some of > the things i witness every day. > i think kids need to be trained from a young age > how to deal with roads.... esp busy ones!! > > it pisses me off because they always try to blame > the driver!! the pedestrian is to blame as well > at times.... What a thoroughly tactless and inappropriate post.

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > David Shrigley knows who it is I like his take on art... http://knotoryus.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/crap.png But don't think the ED collection is quite his style.

maxxi Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think the Cork lads have it right... > > "There have also been rumours of the urine being > used as fertiliser or indeed, as part of research > into the generation of hydrogen fuel from the > urine, but these are unconfirmed." > > ... yes, it's the ED green party R&D dept. I'm surprised ED's allotment owners aren't fighting over this stuff.. all those free nitrates. And if the cab driver has kidney disease or an STD, plenty veg-friendly other minerals too. And all 100% natural.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I still don't think the colour's right for urine, > even if the person was rather dehydrated. And all > the bottles are full... does the driver keep the > bottle in his car until it's full? Have a look at the colour of these ones: http://mobile.corkindependent.com/news/newslistitem/4959 http://www.eadt.co.uk/news/lawshall_more_than_60_bottles_of_urine_found_in_suffolk_village_1_1182461 http://www.flickriver.com/groups/truckerbombs/pool/interesting/ http://www.flickr.com/groups/truckerbombs/pool/page2/