healey

Old people moaning about kids. Listen to yourselves.

Agree. They should be planning BOTH OKR and Camberwell tube links right now. The need is acute.

"Fat" tree? FFS

Found it and done.

There's another dangerous wall on Lacon road next to a tree that is pushing it out. Anyone have a link or number to report it?

I thought the same about this wall and then promptly forgot about it. Thanks for posting.

Lordship 516: "HS2 nor HS3 do not fit this criteria as the payback is uncertain in both time & yield and in these austere times ought to be put to one side in favour of improving existing networks where the benefits are measurable & can be implemented in the relative short term." Good points but don't agree with this bit - upgrading existing networks isn't much less expensive in the long term and adds limited capacity (often reducing it over the time period of the works). We can't rely on Victorian infrastructure forever, so let's get HS2/3 built.

The Co-op doesn't have a car park, so I don't think this "format" argument stacks up. The vast majority of customers will be on-foot commuters on their way to and from work. The site is perfectly suitable for that.

Actually the original tiled finish was of far higher quality. A nice bit of mid-century design. Looks like they've removed it for no other reason than the developer was too tight to fork out for bespoke replacement windows. Off the peg windows which ruin the original composition and cheap render to fill the gaps. Crap. Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The old Iceland building was an eyesore in my > opinion. At least putting a bit of lipstick on > the bulldog has made it look a little bit more > contemporary and smarter.

I do three 5k a week. Used to go longer but now prefer to chase times instead. That's very low compared to some.

Indeed, on what grounds? Deliveries? Sainsbury's and Londis don't seem to cause any disruption.. Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > James Barber Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Yes the M&S store applied for longer times to > sell alcohol than their planning permission > allows. > > > I objected to the licence application. > > > > Why? (just out of interest)

Just make your own with a mapping app. I have one that takes in East Dulwich, Dulwich Park/Village and Sydenham Hill wood (including the steep path up to the Wood House pub). Hurts like hell!

steveo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I see these red-faced specimens slogging past my > house morning and evening, rucksacks slapping > against their sweaty backs, dodging bikes, buses > and kids on scooters. > > How far are they going? The station? Camberwell? > Lombard Street? Are they in training or are they > just poor? What do their workmates make of the > fragrance arising from their desks? > > I can only think it's a ghastly import from > America or Australia and I hope no one from the > forum indulges in this uncivilised behaviour. Get your arse out of your house and ask them instead of posting scornful crap on an internet forum?

Greedy sod. A three storey extension on a two storey house! Can't see that getting permission...

Someone should tell Dulwich College then. Cost of everything, value of nothing, etc. Plus it's great for a new school to retain an artifact of the area's local histoty. ed_pete Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > James Barber Wrote: > > Keeping the central 'chateau' good. > In your opinion. > I am sure the cost of converting an old building > to comply with modern building standards and the > associated maintenance would be better spent on > other school facilities.

What's wrong with a blend? I like the propsal, and I'm very much a fan of modern architecture. ed_pete Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Consultation still open till 19/4. > > Retention of any of the existing hospital building > ?the central chateaux? is bound to lead to > compromises from an > architectural design standpoint. The building has > served its purposes and now needs to go to make > way for > something that is innovative, inspirational, > exciting and modern. East Dulwich is not a museum > and we need to free > ourselves from the past and look to the future.

Most of the hospital WILL have been pulled down. The retention is s nice touch. Pugwash Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > having worked in ED Hospital - my team were moved > out and it was discovered that the rooms we > occupied, the floor was about to collapse. Much of > the hospital is in poor condition and would be > cheaper to pull down rather than repair.

The pagan element is much more sensible if you have to explain it to to a three year old child. The idea of eggs and rebirth, no problem. The ressurection of a guy who was tortured to death by neing nailed to a cross through his hands and feet, not so easy. Christianity is grim.

Great news. Absolutely correct decision.

Perhaps not, but loss of light might be an issue since all the flats face that way. In any case, kids facilities should be supported in inner cities. first mate Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > No doubt there will be a few who argue that this > is the city, so what do you expect? I'd object but > a number will say we need more housing at whatever > cost. I'm not sure that having "views stolen" is > an argument that cuts it these days.

Peckham is a stupid distance to go to get a mail package.

If that's the case then as well as upset kids and parents you'll also have some very angry residents in the block right next to it who would have their views stolen.

Rahrah makes a valid point about the 37. It is very unreliable, especially from Brixton, where gaps of up to half an hour open up in peak time. I know this because I've stood waiting for them on many occasions. No need to resort to ad hominem, either. rabbitears Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 4 buses an hour is overnight when Brixton tube > isn't open anyway. > > You're notorious for saying that anything that > isn't a tube is rubbish, and for demanding stuff > that actually already exists (secure bike parking > at Peckham Rye, a regular bus from east Dulwich to > Brixton...). You've made it clear you won't be > happy until there's a tube station close (but not > too close!) to your front door, regardless of how > many trains and buses and cycle routes there are - > but if a tube is that critical to you, why did you > come or stay in east Dulwich?

nxjen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > For those seeking a direct train line from ED to > Charing Cross, I'm no engineer but there would be > huge logistical problems. I agree about this, but other links could be improved to better facilitate it. No reason a tube link to Camberwell wouldn't work if the will was there.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > rahrahrah Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > In fact, I have suggested some secure bike > parking > > at Brixton and some more buses connecting to > the > > tube there. This seems pretty modest to me and > > possibly more constructive than 'just move'. > > If that's aimed at me, you must have > misunderstood. > > Someone else said that the lack of a direct west > end link was the core problem. I disagree - and I > repeat - it's not realistic to expect every area > to have a direct link into the west end. Perfectly reasonable when said area lies at the far end of a major northern route filled with bus traffic that heads into the West End. Also perfectly reasonable when people are clogging up eastern and western lines to avoid this route.