Arthur Facksake

ackroyd Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I am also extremely pleased that there will be a > new state secondary school in the area. As has > been said by many on here, it is much needed. > I think it's a positive thing if there is more > than one bid and hope that this will encourage all > bidders to consult widely with the local community > to ensure that the bids truly reflect local need. > Also hope that all parties will conduct a fair, > transparent and professional process that will > result in strong bids focused on the needs of the > young people in our local community. Then leave it > up to the DfE to decide which is the best one to > take forward. I fully agree, the trouble is people, especially James Barber are talking as if Haberdashers is a done deal. Taken from a quote above....... ....."I'm in politics to make a difference. You're right my kids are too old to attend the school we're creating but I would send them if it was in place. Haberdashers' Aske's will be a fantastic school and add to the other great schools we have" Is it a done deal or is something underhand going on. Are the Lib Dem's able to put pressure on the DfE, maybe they have people in place there that can influence things. I don't know, just seems a bit cut and dried to me.

Stateeducation Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > James Barber, who choose expensive private > education, has no place trying to lead the > campaign for a state school within the heart of > our community. > > Out of touch, unrepresentative and elitist. Stick > to your public school Mr Barber, who have no place > leading the campaign for our local community > school No wonder he's so against Charter (quite clear from the first couple of pages on this thread), he lives in the catchment unlike many who crave a Charter place, yet sends his children to a private school. It would be embarrassing to promote a school then turn their back on it for self interest. HA supposedly ticked all the boxes, how thorough was the process? Not very by the look of it, if they can't deliver on time projects they are currently involved in what chance is there of having a new school in ED on time. Was this question even asked? A cheap attempt at electioneering.

nicmc Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > njc97 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > James - do HA really have the project team > > capacity since a) they havent started building > the > > new free primary school (although they have now > > got planning permission) and b) they havent > > finished rebuilding the other primary school in > > the Federation (not sure what stage this is > at)? > > As a parent whose children attend HA primary at > present I would have serious doubts about their > ability to open a school in promised times. One > primary burnt down Easter 2010 and there is still > have no clear idea when this is to be reopened > (currently rumoured to be around Easter 2015). The > free school yet to be built despite assurances > this was to be completed by Sept 2014. The > federation is so large and expansive parents > concerns are entirely lost in the machine. Thank you for pointing this out, I'm surprised no-one else has or maybe I shouldn't be.

The way this thread is going you would think it was James Barber's idea to have a cinema in Lordship Lane, it wasn't the discussions were already under way long before he was even aware. He was previously in favour of a nursery on the site site and all he's done is ride on the back of the positive comments. Read the thread from the beginning again.

1-1 now, 78th minute equaliser.

NunheadRising Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Arthur Facksake Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Scousers? > > > you idiot Meeooww!

Scousers?

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi AF, > Not much else we can do while the majority of > people in the area have expressed a desire to > avoid controlled parking. How about refusing planning permission unless the developers alter their plans for underground car parking or limit the number of flats for space for a residents car park.

Re: East Dulwich councillor - how can I help? Posted by James Barber March 13, 09:18PM I'm very excited. I've just been told that the former Garden Centre next to East Dulwich station will be demolished during April and works will begin to building 20 new flats, a shop unit and long desired new Grove Vale library. I came up with the new Grove Vale library 9 years ago so can;t wait to see it open summer 2015. Great, another 40 cars parked in Melbourne Grove and surrounding streets. Thanks.

No comment from the council about the future of the club, OK, no planning application has been submitted to build on Greendales or the stadium but it would be nice to know their stance on the takeover by a property developer.

Penguin68 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Considering some of the (surprising) negativity on > this thread, perhaps 'The Rotzy' would be best Actually the whole thread has been very positive as should be expected, just a couple of people making something out of nothing.

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Someone mentioned the pedestrian barriers outside > the cinema. I reference the existing barriers on > the PUBLIC FOOTPATH are probably going to be > removed. > > The proposed fencing spelling out Dulwich > Picturehouse is part of the proposed cinema. I;d > prefer them to East Dulwich Picturehouse but > either way they look a nice touch on the drawings > exhibited on Saturday. Let's clarify things once and for all. The hall boundary is to have designer Dulwich Picturehouse railings, the kerbside pedestrian barriers originally placed to stop the children and later hall users from walking or running straight into the road (situated in front of the old school doors) and are to remain according to the artistic impression. The original post jokingly expected people to come out from a darkened cinema straight into the road, not funny in my opinion, this won't happen with the kerbside barriers still there.

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The pedestrian barriers on the pavement are likely > ot be removed. They're a hangover from when it was > school 20+ years ago. I had the ones on Archdale > Road from the previous school there last year. What evidence can you back this claim up with, as stated before they are clearly depicted on the artist impression of the completed development. For someone supposedly supportive of the project a statement such as yours is extremely negative and potentially harmful.

Actually these guys who you condemn for enjoying themselves and supporting the team are the ones who travel to most of the away games and know exactly what's going on. If you don't want singing then I suggest you go to a Premiership match.

strae Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Suspect they have also forgotten about a > pedestrian barrier / cattle grid to ensure that > offending patrons (e.g. old people and young > children) emerging from the darkness of the cinema > into the light of the street are prevented from > causing unnecessary traffic disruptions. > Actually if you'd bothered to visit the presentation or view the photo of the proposed scheme posted above you'll see the pedestrian barriers which are already there will stay, probably for the exact reason you've stated.