Southeast Twenty Stu

egoode Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I've never heard of tipping binmen or the postman > as someone else suggested. I'm not even sure how > I'd do it given I'm not home when they come by. I > do tip my cleaner though at Christmas. Don't want to divert the thread too much, but out of interest, how much do you tip your cleaner? I've been wondering what might be appropriate.

... before speed bumps.

I genuinely can't remember the last time I had a cyclists come toward me on the pavement - yet some people on the forum appear to be encountering them daily. I don't get it.

They're idiots. How much money they have or haven't got is irrelevant.

So 270 tube stations and (outside of central zone 1), SE London has just 5: Oval, Kennington, Bermondsey Canada Water and North Greenwich. It's a pretty poor show. The Northern Line was an obvious contender for extension into SE London, but it's being diverted off to the west to subsidise a private development of investment properties. Regardless of any consultation, a Bakerloo extension will end up doing the same, directed not towards Camberwell and Peckham where there is existing demand, but inevitably down the Old Kent Road to some currently empty plot in order to enrich someone's property portfolio.

.

This isn't NIMYISM. I don't live on Crystal Palace Road, but it seems a strange place to locate a 24 hour pharmacy with needle exchange. I'm not against such a development, but surely north criss road or lordship lane would make more sense.

.

.

Postman Woes, Pat's older, grumpier brother.

Estate agents will be referring to it as 'South Peckham', in an attempt to increase it's cache with potential buyers.

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > That seems pretty weak - to turn down a real > opportunity now for private funding to create > infrastructure to regenerate an almost delict > inner London area, in favour of non-existent plans > for the future that in any case would come a long > way behind other proposed projects and ambitions > for the Bakerloo and Victoria lines? Maybe you're right, but it proves my point that this is not strategic.

The northern line crosses under the Thames, therefore it is important not to kill off the southern end of the line just a few stops south if the river. This extension diverts a line from its natural course further into south London, into a dead end. The plans do not leave any room for further future, expansion. As there are only a small number of lines which actually cross the river into south London, its important not to limit future development IMO.

It's about strategic investment versus tactical / opportunistic expansion. There is some money on the table to do something, anything, so let's do it....but it kills off any potential future extension and provides minimal benefits. There are a finite number if river crossings, so its important that they are utilised to the fullest. This is short term politics, not strategic transport policy.

Yes, maybe the Elmington Estate which Southwark demolished a decade ago and then left derelict could also be used for parking...... Or Southwark could stop being so disgracefully inefficient and incompetent in creating huge areas of wasteland in the first place.

.

Surely the best route to bond street would previously have been via London bridge? Can't see how going out to Canada Water to get on further down the jubilee line can be quicker / easier.

The end of London Bridge trains from/to Denmark Hill is a bigger issue than the reduction in the number of trains to Victoria IMO. This line provides a direct connection between two of South London's major teaching hospitals (Kings and Guys). I must admit, I hadn't even picked up on the changes to Charing Cross trains which will no longer stop at London Bridge. Overall, it seems to me that Camberwell in particular will end up more poorly connected as a result of these changes.