northlondoner

Drew. I see what you did there ....

Hope she's ok

angiepangie Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > There was a single brown shoe on the wall opposite > the actress pub on Sunday midday. Not sure what > happened to the other one or if these are the ones > you are referring too but might be worth having a > look there? Bizarre, I saw this shoe too! It was on the wall of the not-so-secret cop shop opposite the Actress. Wasnt there when I walked by yesterdsy ( Monday)

And breathe.....

Most of it Halal and Kosher, I heard!

BrandNewGuy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > peckhamasbestos Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > moral? > > > > public transport stinks.....apologies if you > have > > to rely upon it, but generally I don't, and > will > > never agan because it just doesn't work! > > > > you will not get me out of the only solidly > > reliable form of transport which is my car ( & > > bike) until there is a cohesive and reliable > > transport network in SE London! > > Moral: check TFL's website and you'd know that > there were no trains from ED this week and no > Northern Line Bank branch. We went from ED to > Camden and back last night on public transport and > it was a breeze (176 to Waterloo, Northern Line to > Camden Town). Just sayin'... Surely the onus is on the service provider to provide the service - rather than the customer to check before making every journey. Do you make a note of all the suspended services before setting out just in case you decide to do something crazy - like deciding on the spur of the moment go somewhere in addition to your carefully mapped out original route? Wild idea, I know! I travelled by public transport on Saturday to Kensington then White City then Waterloo. No suspended services but the most balls achingly crammed trains - even at 0700. I can't stand driving, a lot of the time - but the transport system sucks so badly I will drive next time. Its now wonder we have such high levels of car ownership.

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > People who claim to dislike Iceland seem to have > an Over-rated Sense of Importance. > > It would seem that to them, that shopping there > is below them. > > Well, they need to get over it. > > Unlike some other outlets, Iceland has the > survived the Test of Time by providing the kind > of service that many people want. > > > Fox. Exaggerated sense of importance? In East Dulwich? That's outrageous.

Phew. Glad it's worked out ok. Give her a hug for all of us.

No

StraferJack Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > didn't Hisar used to be run by an Irish couple? Used to be an art shop. Old fashioned.

Loz ..." helping the clause" . Nice ..play on words in response to Tiger. I like the way you roll.

Play nice, Strafer. No need to get all personal, an' ting.

Grumpy Hamster Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > He looked about middle aged, bald/balding, maybe > 5'10"-6' tall, white. I think I saw that guy in walthamstow a couple of weeks ago.

And what about the chinchillas ? Think of the chinchillas you callous bastards.

Sue yes: but less of a picture opportunity for any local media which may be interested .. Eg South London Press etc

Hmmm. James seems like you're not going to answer my repeated question about the council's legal position if it imposes this cpz after a faulty consultation process. Will have to investigate myself.

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'm amazed. > It's clear from the evidence that controlled > parking will resolve the parking pressures for > residents in the proposed streets but it would be > at the expense of free parking. > I think denying the parking pressures problem is > wrong. Accepting the hassle of controlled parking What about the increase of "parking pressure" ( hideous phrase) on streets bordering the cpz ? And I asked you directly about the council's legal position should you insist on trying to foist this upon us on the basis of a laughably skewed, deeply flawed consultation process. Would you answer please ? > And any knock on affects is a serious issue.

Dicey nails it.

What Kruger said. People aren't going to limit their fun to fit in with babies' bedtime. Pour yourself a drink.

'king hell, Tommy.

Where is Woof Marks The Dog?

Radio four in the morning .., with the option of switching to capital when humphreya et al get too bombastic. Johnny vaughn is actuslly very funny and a breath of fresh air .LBC warning : it's the radio equivalent of the daily mail. Lots of closed minds, open mouths and celebration of ignorance. Avoid .

James. I think a lot of people on here - myself included - consider the consultation process wholly flawed ... or a bullshit survey, as bobbyp puts it rather more succinctly. What is the legal position if you guys press ahead with this deeply unpopular hare brained scheme anyway ?

> > > Q4. what is the forecast annual income from the > zone? > A4. Permit take up across Southwark CPZ's is 11% > which would suggest ?16,000pa from resident > permits. If 100% of car owners bought a permit > then ?56,250. James old boy this is such a BS answer. You're better than that. What about projected fines?

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Some days ago four questions were asked of me and > I've just received the answers from council > officers. Please see attached. > I'll try and summarise here as well: > > Q1.how many resident only parking spaces will be > available in the zone after implementation? > A1. approx 558 assuming 5m average length per > vehicles - 530 for permit holders and 28 shared > use bays (pay and display and permit holders). > > Q2. how many cars belong to households within the > zone? > A2. survey showed average of 475 parked vehicles > at 6am over a non school holiday Thurs, Sat and > Sun. DVLA figures suggest 450 vehicles owned by > people in the proposed streets. > > Q3. what is the cost to the council (I seem to > recall an earlier comment that TfL were funding > this? > A3. Funded by TfL, parking enforcement costs would > be within the existing contract. > > Q4. what is the forecast annual income from the > zone? > A4. Permit take up across Southwark CPZ's is 11% > which would suggest ?16,000pa from resident > permits. If 100% of car owners bought a permit > then ?56,250.