jimlad48

I work in Whitehall, and found that it took me the same time to train from DMK and tube from Blackfriars, train to Victoria and walk, bus in via various routes, or just run home (all took about 40 minutes). I end up running home a lot as its free exercise and cheaper!

Maxted road / bellenden road, its about 10m difference and right on the junction so same difference really for me- i always call it Bellenden Road. I shall now hold my head in shame :-)

We've started using Ganapathi takeaway quite a lot - very different set of food, far more fish based and south indian in nature and does Paratha not Naan. Worth a look!

Two great alternative Indian restaurants that really buck the trend are Ganapathi in Bellenden Road, which does take out and really pushes south indian food (their Parathas and Lassis are divine), and Gymkhana in the centre. The latter has a lot of awards and is pricey in the evening, but does a reasonably priced (roughly ?25-30) lunch which will leave you fit to explode with food. Definitely recommend the latter if you want to see what amazing Indian food tastes like, and couldnt be further from the starchy tablecloth if you tried.

On Vestry Road in Camberwell, a new middle eastern cafe has opened up that does excellent and good value food like meze and baklava - i have not been yet but my other half is raving about it. Its slightly off usual beaten track for footfall but is well worth a visit.

TheArtfulDogger Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > jimlad48 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > So it > > won't displace onto local streets - there isn't > > anywhere left that isnt a CPZ already in > > Southwark. > > > Obviously not a frequent visitor to East Dulwich > then jimlad Fair one - but the difference is probably that East Dulwich isn't as good for commuting as the Toast Rack / other streets locally are. I doubt you'll see many people shift there. The reason these streets got so busy was because they were on busy commuter routes with multiple bus and train stations within a 5 minute walk nearby - not sure that there is anywhere similar in ED that still qualifies.

There are no streets left in the local area which arent a CPZ - we were the last area not to be one, so we got all the traffic. There is quite literally nowhere for the traffic to go now other than to displace onto public transport. So it won't displace onto local streets - there isn't anywhere left that isnt a CPZ already in Southwark.

The cost of Southwark parking permits have gone up ?5 in about 10 years. These sort of consultations never make everyone happy, but in the case of a couple of the streets that wanted to be left out, then the salutary tale I'd offer is that the council did just this back in 2012 when it last consulted the toastrack area. There was a split so they created a split CPZ, which in turn resulted in everyone not wanting to pay parking their cars a few streets over, and at the same time increased pressure happened when all the commuters started parking there too. Demands for a new consultation quickly began, and by the time this one came about all the streets that were most anti last time were now leading the way to see a CPZ in place. I can see why the Council is keen to avoid this happening again, particularly for only a couple of streets which voted no when its experience is that these will quickly become parking magnets, and will almost certainly ask for one quickly after. Its merely predicting the inevitable result and bringing it into play. I for one welcome the peace and quiet that will begin, will look forward to not being stalked by commuter drivers, the end of arguments and violence and constant cars driving dangerously to race for a space, and look forward to being in a street that is much quieter again. At roughly ?2.40 a week, thats a bargain.

Best news I've heard all week! Wonderful result and a great example of the community pulling together to make life better.

The problem is that there are less residents with cars than spaces, but the problem in this area is the following: Heavy useage from commuters who fill up the road from 6am onwards, and spaces rarely become available before 7pm - therefore the residents have nowhere to go on their return. Heavy 'out of hours' use by places like Kings College Hospital - who have increased their parking charges meaning that staff park for free locally, but this increases 'out of hours' pressure even during the weekends. Since recent changes there has been a near total loss of 'spare spaces' during the weekend where even a few years ago there was space. Local residents living in CPZ areas parking their cars long term for free rather than pay for a CPZ, thus denying spaces long term. Finally lots of people who need to use cars need to do so during the day - there are no spaces left when they return from their daily car use and I've heard of people spend an hour looking for a space. There are serious issues for elderly, disabled and parents which are causing major quality of life issues for them. A CPZ makes a vast and life chaniging difference for them.

intexasatthe moment Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > That stretch is definitely a problem .Wouldn't > double yellow lines on one side be as effective as > a CPZ ? Southwark estimate that CPZs drop car use by about 60%. Also some yellow lines are coming in with the proposed CPZ.

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The CPZ won't calm traffic, it may well have the > opposite effect. > Camberwell Grove reopening will improve things. Genuinely curious - why do you think reducing the number of vehicles on the streets by about 60%, and removing all the daily commuters fighting for spaces make it busier for traffic?

Welcome to the area, as a toast rack resident I feel your pain. The traffic is mildly worse at the moment than usual due to the closure of camberwell grove. Part of the current problem too is that due to the lack of parking restrictions anyone can park here and the whole area functions as a free for all for commuters using local stations and bus routes. Thankfully a consultation was held last autumn to get a CPZ, and it looks like there has been a positive reaction. If a CPZ does come in over the summer, then expect traffic to drop considerably as the commuters find other streets to clog up, and Cambwerwell Grove reopens.

We'll have to agree to disagree. I've looked carefully at this, and I am comfortable that it was the only option. In a total war, where you have specified unconditional surrender, then don't expect negotiations. The allied position had been clear for years - uconditional surrender, which the Japanese were not prepared to accept. If you read the wiki article as a good starting point, its also clear that contrary to rumour, removal of the emperor wasn't a precondition. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surrender_of_Japan Dropping atomic bombs isn't something you just 'do' and you have to be certain of the target, conditions for release and so on. It wasnt an experiment to drop bombs, it was a means to a shortcutting an end to a terrible period of suffering, and saved millions of lives in the process. Gesture bombing for want of a better word only works if it can be seen to work - dropping a bomb on a remote part of the country, in a nation replete with censorship and that has suffered years of firebombing would have no impact. It was only by demonstrating openly the power the allies held so publicly that they were able to send a message. I never want to see a nuclear weapon employed again, but I do think that sadly their use was 100% justifiable in the context of ending the most terrible war in human history.

It is very dangerous with the hindsight of history to make value judgements on the final days of WW2. The context of the time was very different - the war against Japan was effectively a total war - the Japanese had mobilised their entire nation to fight, to the extent that bamboo spears were being distributed to the population to fight invaders. The majority of Japanese industry was located in towns, many of which were destroyed by firebombs, in order to raze the industry to the ground. The reason Hiroshima and Nagasaki were chosen was because they hadn't been on the prior target list, meaning it was easier to understand the effects of the device - ironically Nagasaki was unlucky - they were the fallback target, but cloud cover over the primary meant they had to divert Bockscar (the bomber) to the secondary. In those days, when you had assembled an atomic bomb, you had to 'use it or lose it' as the core decayed at such an astonishingly fast rate, you'd have been unable to use it again after that mission. There were only 3 devices in existence, so once assembled, it needed to be used. The context you need to remember is simple - this was total war, and men,women and children were all legitimate targets for both sides. The US had just razed Tokyo to the ground killing tens of thousands of people (Japanese cities were made of wood, so burned easily) and Nagasaki in particualar arguably demonstrated that the atomic bomb, while spectacular, wasn't a particularly effective means of doing widespread damage - it wiped out some of the city centre, but a lot of the industry was in some form intact. Firebombing was a more effective means of destroying cities then, not atomic bombs. Set against the firebombing was the reality that the Allies were expecting to invade Japan - there was no 'surrender' culture, and the Japanese people at the time ferverently believed in fighting to the death (huge numbers of suicides in many of the island campaigns ocurred rather than be captured). The incredibly optimistic assumptions I've read on this plan (known as OP OLYMPIC) was that you'd see at least 1 million US / Allied dead during the final campaign to capture the home islands. The Japanese predicted losses were almost incalculable - given the unwillingness to surrender, the low food stores and their desperate situation, I'd have expected the Japanese people to probably be close to being wiped out. Thats because this was a total war of national survival with the gloves off and no willingness on either side to give quarter. OP OLYMPIC was very real - when the war in Europe ended, many US and British units were being shipped straight to Asia to prepare for the next invasion. The use of the atomic bomb was the last throw of the dice to try and force a surrender (in fact as originally conceived the atomic bombs would have been used in Berlin and Germany, but the war ended there too soon for their use). The use created conditions where the Japanese military and Government finally accepted they were facing capabilities that they could not counter - and set the conditions for surrender. Was it bloody - absolutely. Did it save the lives of millions of Japanese and Allied personnel and civilians. Yes. I'm afraid that total wars are terrible terrible things, and the loss of a few tens of thousands of civilians versus the millions predicted is sadly a reasonable trade off. I've spent many years reading on, studying and trying to understand the final days of WW2 and the early atomic strategy. Its clear that the circumstances of the time, which I feverently hope are never repeated, means that the dropping of the two bombs shortened the war by over a year, and saved an incalculable number of lives, albeit at an awful price.

tarafitness Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ...at gone 1am > > I've seen it all now. > > Can't have been lost, surely? You've seen it all? To quote Team America 'have you ever seen a man eat his own head'? :-)

If you are seeking to get a CPZ (parking stress discussion), we found the best way was to get a large petition organised (in excess of I think 300 names is required) which sets out the locals want a CPZ and acknowledge the cost of ?125 per year to pay for it. This can be presented at the community council, who in response will usually order a CPZ consultation. We did this to great effect in the Toast Rack as the consultation has led to a recommendation for implementation of a CPZ.

Thanks fo this - As a Shenley Resident. I've tipped off the local residents that i know. The only thought i would have on the moped was whether the moped guy was looking ofr parking, which is in desperately short supply at the moment? Worrying developments.

We have had several car break ins on the toast rack recently using similar methods. I wonder if they are linked?

I dont think anyone is moaning about kids, they are just saying that while its great that some places are child friendly, its equally great some places arent child friendly. Long may that continue.

No - and many residents in camberwell do lurk here as nearest forum relevant to the wider area.

I would happily go to an establishment where little people are not welcome. I am a non parent and find noisy children, particularly babies and toddlersincredibly irritating and loud and therefore choose not to patronise 'family friendly' cafes so as to avoid them where possible. If I could go somewhere where lack of little people was 100% guaranteed, then that would be nirvana for me. I am not anti children, far from it, but not everyone feels comfortable in public places where little people are present, particularly if they are (often for very good reason) being noisy or poorly behaved. Plenty of places are very child friendly, so its nice to feel us childless folk have somewhere to go too!

A warning to residents that there have been multiple vehicle break ins on the toastrack in Camberwell in the last few days. This has involved smashed windows, items stolen and a lot of damage. According to residents, the method of the burglary is strikingly similar to previous spates of thefts that occurred a couple of years ago - in those (and these) circumstances, the thefts seem to occur when cars are parked on the bits of the roads less visible from occupied houses. Please be aware of this, particularly if is spreading. Police have been informed. From a personal point of view, this is yet further proof that a CPZ is desperately needed on these streets to reduce congestion and allow cars to be parked safely in front of houses, and not streets away whereever a space is available. Lets hope the Recent consultation is a Yes vote for a CPZ when its announced next month.

My impression, and that of some others actively campaigning in favour of a CPZ was that many of the residents who vociferously wanted a CPZ had been residents of the toastrack for more than a decade, myself included and in some case several decades, and in a few cases well over half a century and in at least one case since before WW2! To characterise this as new residents is unfair. Ultimately the sheer number of local residents who signed the petition asking Southwark to reopen the consultation on 6 roads was significant - apparently it was one of the biggest petitions from local residents asking for a consultation ever seen by Southwark, who were clear that the very strong support fo a CPZ in this area made it a high priority to consult on. Everyone who signed the initial petition was asked to confirm they were prepared to pay these associated costs, and not one felt it unfair to do so. The parking on the toastrack at the moment is pure, unmitigated hell. Anyone using a car during the day will lose the space in moments and local residents regularly reported being stalked by commuters who watched their movements and knew when they would leave each day, and thus find their specific car and park alongside it each morning. There have been multiple fights and other public order issues over parking, and many residents have suffered thousands of pounds worth of damage due to vehicles being badly parked pn the street due to pressure and weight of numbers. Most mornings there are no spaces left by 7am, and rarely many before 7pm because commuters grab them. Meanwhile other residents living in CPZ areas too selfish to pay a CPZ fee to park on their streets use ours, increasing parking pressure (and ironically driving up demand for a CPZ) whilst other people use the streets as dumping ground for out of tax or otherwise abandoned cars. I and other residents met with fellow locals and heard dreadful stories of vile abuse thrown at people, pf harassment of mothers desperately trying to unload a car but unable to park anywhere pn the 6 streets, of people unable to receive daily nursing visits because their nurse cannot find a parking space, of people in mews blocked in for days at a time because commuters park in front of a dropped kerb and abandon their cars. The experiences we heard were both terrifying and heart wrenching. That is why there was enormous support for the CPZ consultation and why people are mpre than happy to pay to park. As for the argments about parking vouchers, all I would say is that the vouchers are only needed when the zone is active and can be bought online without a physical voucher being needed. Ultimately the trick is to either visit outside of the zone hours or at weekends when it is free or if you do need visits during the dwy, either guests need to use public transport, or accept that at least they will get a space - currently the council estimates the Toast Rack os running at greater than 90% occupancy all day while most CPZ zines struggle to get 30-40% use. I desperately hope and pray we get a CPz as it will make a genuinely life changing difference for hundreds of residents whp are sick and tired of living in a rat run. It cannot come soon enough

The result whould be known in January. Initial impressions were a very strong support for a CPZ including many residents who had previously been opposed to it. As expected the establishment of cpz elsewhere has pushed a lot of traffic onto these streets, and it was makg life insufferable for residents, many of whom were vulnerable and it was directly impinging on their quality of life. My sense is that it will pass, and given that other donsultations are ocurring in peckham rye and elsewhere, I think Southwark is about out of free parking now.