first mate

James, Re the proposals for the junction of Northcross rd and Lordship Lane, I'm not sure I understand your point about currently redundant tarmac, which cars cannot use, being made more useful by building out the pavement. I may have completely misunderstood but is is not the case that the areas you refer to are covered on one side by white zig zag lines and the other by double yellow lines? Cars cannot park on those areas but they are able to move forward both ways when the lights change. If the pavement is built out won't this reduce traffic to a single line at that point? You also have a bus stop either side as well as traffic lights, so the sum total could be massively reduced traffic flow. Won't this simply cause people to find more rat runs?

I agree with ITATM, the matter has not been debated on here at all, the issue has been raised because many are not clear where the idea came from or of any consultation on the matter. Thank you for engaging providing some information but absolute clarity is necessary. I have also noticed double yellows suddenly springing up where there used to be none- presumably all part of the agenda by some to further reduce parking? It makes no sense to on the one hand urge on developers but also systematically introduce a variety of measures that incrementally reduce parking space...where will that lead, oh yes, CPZ.

James, Re the refurbishment of the carriageway table at the EDG Melbourne Grove junction, could we find out more about the reason/need for this work? It is literally only months ago that work was carried out on this same area. If that original work was faulty/substandard then a fine should be made, if it is something else then why was it not identified and carried out at the same time? For me the term 'refurbishment' is incredibly vague. Is this yet another example of the great CONway gravy train, all at the taxpayers expense?

This is worth a read http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/nov/18/one-in-six-gp-surgeries-england-risk-patients-poor-care Note that Melbourne Grove- a dire example of the preferred model of super-chain GP Practices (Concordia owned)- has not yet been looked at.

It's bonkers. The main road through ED should not be narrowed, this will lead to more congestion and pollution at busy times- for instance imagine an Iceland/M&s juggernaut one side and a bus the other. Don't accept entrance to Nx looks a mess. Don't see how placing a load of bike racks and widening the pavement will turn an alleged 'mess' into a thing of beauty. At the only time of the week the entrance is busy the whole of that part of the road is closed off and pedestrianised. For the rest of the week it is not especially busy. Placing a whole load of bike racks in one area will add to congestion of pavement. It would make more sense to spread them along LL.

It's just the relentless cramming of every tiny bit of space. Next we'll have cases made for building up since there'll be no horizontal space left-especially if back gardens begin to be sliced and diced by developers. Recently went past Nine Elms and shocked to see Boris' grand vision if a skyscraper tunnel rapidly realised. No more views of the river-all sold up to international developers.

The primary stated aim us to make it look better because currently it looks a mess.

And not supporting the Harris bid to open a primary school on the Dulwich Hospital site.

So, on that basis, you have to wonder what the real agenda driving this is? Sometimes it feels like there is this overarching vision for ED that is held in the brains of certain Councillors, which is not shared with voters, but where that vision is achieved piecemeal by driving through changes by whatever means possible. Sorry if I sound deeply cynical.

Mustard for those of us that own pets and have seen the effects that impromptu banger fests can have, there is, be assured, real sympathy for you.

James, who says it looks a mess? If you were the person that asked for these works to be done you would have known that safety was a marginal issue yet at first you offered this as justification along with the aesthetic point.

I may be way off but I wonder if this has anything to do with the proposed M&S and flats above and possible planning conditions- remember how there was all that stuff about no pressure on parking because everyone will walk or come on bikes/ public transport? Hard to know why a sudden need for all this investment at LL/Nx.

Thus would make a great news piece, eager journos need to get out and investigate re the recent scandal about corruption in housing depts.

Kiera, Nail on head. And all kinds if alterations are being planned for the junction of nx/LL, without any pressing reason.

Poor lad. Some animals are simply more prone to developing noise fears- probably a genetic thing. Yes, think something stronger indicated.

Yes, but why now and why here in particular? Slowing down cars will also slow down buses and not everyone wants or is able to get on bike. I don't feel narrowing a main road is necessarily a good thing either

Just checked crash map and only one serious incident in last 9 years at that location, and no incidents since 2008. The map also shows, as you say James, many other streets close by with similar problems or worse, so safety is not the real reason I guess. Have their been complaints about the quality of experience at the junction for market goers?

James where is this website and who runs it. Since you have seen it can you say how many crashes in that location? It's just good to be clear about the rationale.

Oh I see, your being humorous.

James, How many crashes have there been in that location? I always feel the market is quite busy enough so not sure it needs to be still more appealing. Is the purpose of improving the appeal to bring in greater numbers or just to provide a better experience?

Kk, the general view is let your dog be with you and even lie beside you but don't actively comfort them as this can tell the dog that you are also worried. If a dog shows any anxiety about fireworks I would not walk him after dark when there is a chance of random bangers etc..., as fear/anxiety reactions can increase quickly and start to generalise to other similar sounds. It is a pain though. I used to enjoy an evening walk with my dog but would not risk it now. This firework business has got way out of hand and I would happily see them made illegal fir anything but official, organised events. I also wonder about the effects on wildlife and the environment. Sparks67 You have no option but to let your cat hide, if you can provide a small, dark soundproof den preferably in the centre if the home away from windows, so much the better. Feliway will help with a cat that is mildly anxious but not one that us clearly terrified. I'd speak to your vet about something stronger as well as desensitisation. Us humans understand what us going on, animals cannot and the fallout can be a totally screwed up pet, literally animal PTSD. This is why random firework parties with no warning to neighbours are so thoughtless. Letting off the odd banger for a laugh is moronic.

Might be worth a read http://www.backcountryattitude.com/toxic_fireworks.html

I think it's those grownups wanting to play outdoors with their bangers in the early hours that need to get a grip.

KK, if he'll gnaw a bone while fireworks are going off then there is a good chance you could desensitise him next year. Food and the reaction to it is a good indicator of how scared the dog is. Refusal of a bone would mean the dog is terrified. I am coming across more and more people with traumatised pets. Occasional fireworks are ok but the current situation has gone way beyond that and there can be absolutely no excuse for letting fireworks off after 12 pm.

"we agree that precedent should not be set for building in all back gardens" It is likely that if this development goes through it will be viewed as a precedent by other developers and perhaps planning departments in future.