first mate

Just to be clear, I refer to the OLd Police Station site. ALl the hoardings and builders gear still very much in situ. first mate Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It's pretty shoddy. It does seem developers are a > law unto themselves and S'wark make weak > protestations but otherwise turn a blind eye. > > James, please let us know the next move. They must > not be allowed to get away with this or we will > get more and more of this type of behaviour.

It's pretty shoddy. It does seem developers are a law unto themselves and S'wark make weak protestations but otherwise turn a blind eye. James, please let us know the next move. They must not be allowed to get away with this or we will get more and more of this type of behaviour.

James, my last comment was in regard to Dulwich Hamlet Football Ground and planning's response to developers request to remive section 106!

ZT, Fair play.

Zebedee, no did not think you were being ironic, seemed more you were offended by my comment. If saving on tax bills was my main point I'd probably have mentioned it first, no? I think it is reasonably clear that my main point was, as others have said, it is no biggie to take 5 minutes, a broom and dustpan to clear leaves outside one's house- mention of children and, last, council tax savings, were mere asides.

If anything this reads like preparing the ground for further applications.

I don't see your point. What's wrong with parents asking older, healthy kids to help with a minor job like sweeping leaves?

Exactly, it only takes a minute or two. it's a useful way for children to help out too. If there are neighbours who are less able bodied or elderly offer to do theirs. This way our streets would be clear of leaves in no time and we'd save on council bills too. Rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > mynamehere Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > It takes one full minute? less ? 2 minutes? to > > clear the leaves in front of your house... They > are > > cutting youth services ffs > > ^This. Seriously, I've seen plenty of council leaf > clearing going on, but leaves will quickly > accumulate again. Sweep up in front of your house > if there are a lot of leaves, it only takes a > minute.

Rahrahrah, The carefully constructed rationale is that it is cheaper to do all the roads rather than having to research each road and put in double yellows piecemeal ( but only where really necessary). So they have come up with the ruse that it is better and cheaper to just do the whole of ED in one go. Hats of to the CPZ meister who came up with that one.

Dimples, I know... (rolls eyes).

The extending yellow lines scheme is a thinly veiled attempt to drive through CPZ. There is already an increase on parking pressure in ED why then introduce swathes of yellow lines everywhere, removing many more spaces? I've just read Cllr Barber's objection and hope the Council listens. If there are a few junctions with a crash record that need these then okay but it would be useful to see a crash map and comparison data for before and after 20mph. Edited because had not seen James Barber's reply.

Someone said Pizza Express. I am hoping they were joking.

This is exacly what the developer will assume and mirrors the progress of the M&S development. In fact all objectors to currently contentious developments, inlcuding this and Greendale/ Dulwich Hamlets should pay close attention and make the effort to get Councillors much more involved as well as objecting. WIth M&S the right noises were made from time to time by our Councillor but in a desultory kind of way.

Weren't we recently assured by a Councillor or Southwark rep it would not go to a chain?

Richard, I think you may have a point. Richard tudor Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I believe that Southwark Council had its own > agenda on traffic flow and this traffic chaos will > prompt them to bring in traffic regulation that > the pen pushers want not the general resident > population. > > How many of the pen pushers actually live in the > area? Not many I would think. > > Local residents know best. Have you every been > asked. Real residents not the cycle mafia.

One more thing, can organisations and individuals who post letters or leaflets halfway way through a letter box, leaving the letterbox partly open, indicating in all liklihood the house is empty at that moment, please stop. It is not only a security risk it also lets expensive heating out of the home. Is this how a letter was taken from someones house? Can penalties be bought against unsolicited leafleters? Local pizza, curry and other establishments please take note.

Wow 'being made' to sign non disclosure agreements is truly shocking. I can only hope that for the tenants/owners involved it was truly worth it and that they are safe and will have homes in future as well as compensation for such a shocking experience.

Discover Dogs at Excel this weekend. A great way to meet and research breeds and breeders. Also a fun family day out if you like dogs.

Yes, RH very aware that 8mph is banned on pavements. My point is that for the 8mph user( and disabled people might be in a hurry too) a segregated lane is better and safer...just as it is for cyclists. If major change to infrastructure is necessary to make cycling really work, these other users must be carefully considered and included wherever possible. It makes sense and I believe would generate more support. Are you saying with space on cycle lanes that it would be impossible for a cyclist to pass a mobility scooter at all? Or is it that it would be annoying for someone doing 15mph to have to slow down temporarily to pass? Of course, if as you seem to suggest, you don't see that many mobilty scooters out and about then perhaps they would not have much impact on cycle journeys anyway- that is so long as the scooter is passable at some speed?

You are forgetting 8mph mobility scooters. The phrase "further excluded" is about looking to the future and how change can benefit a broader cross section of society. I accept that in the short term it may not be possible to include mobility scooters on cycle lanes but it should be weighed in the balance in future. BTW there is a view that 4mph scooters on pavements are as risky for pedestrians as are cyclists on pavements. The width of pavement on Blackfriars is unusual. I note that your argument for limiting cycle lanes to cyclists only seems to be about maintaining a certain speed.. I thought the 15 mph was just about pacifying aggressive and frustrated car drivers on the open road? It doesn't seem like pootling along in dedicated cycle lanes really is an option then. I am not anti cycle lanes or anti cyclist, but I am concerned that major changes to infrastructure are well thought through and as inclusive as possible.

RH, just an observation, and I don't think it is really surprising that where significant changes are mooted for transport routes abd infrastructure that questions are asked as to who will benefit and who might be further excluded.

I've read mobility scooters also use cycle lanes in Copenhagen.

rh, come on. If cycling is on the rise then means to reduce bad behaviour should be considered and people free to relay their experiences and frustrations. You cannot every time dismiss a complaint simply because it has not been 'balanced' by a similar anecdote about bad driving in a car.

RH, Well the Dutch manage it, so perhaps we will have to at some point!