Jenijenjen

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Rockets Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > If it is authorised then the council needs to > > explain why; XR are not a group they should be > > supporting or encouraging. > > Why, exactly? > > This is the most important issue of our time, and > so far as I can see the vast majority of people > are just hoping it will go away. > > We are actually on the brink of extinction, with a > very tiny window of opportunity left to do > something about it. > > The climate scientists' pleas are relegated to the > parts of the online news that nobody looks at. > > We should be grateful to XR for actually doing > something to make people realise what's going on, > instead of burying their heads in the sand. > > If I was younger and in better health, I would > join them. Well said Sue. The EDF demographic has really changed with people living in DV commenting negatively on events in ED. Bring back Louisa.

Spartacus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Jenijenjen Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Whoosh > > > I assume that's the sound of a packed bus passing > you at a stop 😉 Not possible because traffic has been so slowed down by the LTNs that it wouldn't be able to get up enough speed to make a whooshing sound.

Whoosh

Oh Waseley, you haven't been paying attention. It's all the Labour Southwark Council's fault and the Labour London Mayor's fault, any other point of view has become heresy on the Forum.

Used to be called a stealth tax not so long ago

Agreed, but much would depend on how they're selected. Would it be a government appointee (horrors), chosen by a committee made up of a cross section of people or someone who everyone, including children, would be able to vote for. While there are well dodgy members of the royal family, as there are in all walks of life, as an institution that provides the head of state I don't mind it and find it preferable to the alternatives. As for the privilege, there's always going to be people much, much, much better of than me and I don't let that eat into my life though perhaps DKHB has a point regarding jewels mined by slaves.

@dulwichhistory and @dulwichsociety alerted

I think that's right, Durlstone Manor Hotel itself is on the other leg of Champion Hill just around the corner. The building is still there and very secluded opposite the building, formerly The Plantanes, now part of Kings College Hospital. When does your map date from? I attach a screenshot from a map surveyed in 1949 which shows the South Lodge at some stage was renamed The Cottage.

This is why we need to know the individuals who are behind this campaign claiming political impartiality as only then can we decide whether they are indeed impartial. On another thread on the Forum they've made the most ludicrous of statements: "We're sticking to the single issue of LTNs (traffic, transport, road closures) because we believe this links directly to so many other issues relating to social equality, including housing, health, education, local business, protected characteristics, etc." So policies aren't important or necessary regarding housing, health, education, local business, protected characteristics, etc. because get rid of the LTNs and any issues will disappear.

JohnL Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > We have multiple categories in Para sport and it > doesn't make it any less watchable or stop some > superb athletes being very well known. > > The sport issue shouldn't be used as a trojan to > take the T out of LGBT IMHO. I totally agree but equally the T issue should not be used to undermine the rights and lives of women

Besides, whining about the introduction of charges is not incompatible with acknowledging that Southwark charges are less than other councils charge. People do like a good whine regardless ?.

ianr Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What is it like, to have an enhanced shopping > experience? Maybe it's like when you accept cookies on a website you have an enhanced visitor experience?

?? as you had indicated that you didn?t think people would be interested in a Friday night thing due to reduced commuters etc.? Just for the record, this wasn?t something I said.

I don?t know why you?re trying to convince me about a night time market, all I?ve said is it's not going to happen which isn?t the same as being against it. Also a bit strange you?re referring to a ?demand? for a night time market when as far as I know it?s just been suggested by one person!

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make but in my case you're probably right. Seeing the Rolling Stones at the Ealing Club was much more my cup of tea

That?s fair enough, it is after all your opinion but it?s not backed up by the Southwark Plan as you implied.

See my post at 11.05 am today. Before the LTNs Traffic was joining the flow from LL from Derwent, Elsie and Melbourne. Now cars are unable to enter EDG from these roads, the traffic in the central section has decreased.

LA: Not what you said in your previous post, you quoted the section from the Southwark Plan which you interpreted as ?could be something like bars? which is not what the Southwark Plan points to. I have made absolutely no comment whether an evening market would be a good thing or a bad thing.

It could be loads of things. This is still pure conjecture that it might happen in Melbourne Grove and these frameworks do not constitute evidence. Other than granting licenses, whether a bar economy happens in Melbourne Grove is mostly outside of the Council's power. A night market may be interesting but it aint going to happen. There is a huge difference between North Southwark and suburban East Dulwich. ETA The part in the Southwark Plan you quote "Seek to protect East Dulwich?s retail offer and maintain a balance between shops and night time economy uses which protects the amenity of local residents." I take this to mean not to increase the night time economy but to ensure that as shops fall vacant that council priority should be given to regular shops rather than approve a change of use to become a bar or restaurant.

Because neither is it being added to with traffic from Melbourne, Elsie and Derwent as it was before they became LTNs so the amount of traffic along the central section of EDG has decreased.

"I think there is neighbourly bitterness - those whose roads are not closed due to the LTN appear to want those who do have their roads pedestrianised to suffer in some form, be it the annoyance of a market outside your home on a Saturday. am I wrong?" Perhaps not wrong but certainly exaggerated. If the market on Melbourne Grove goes ahead it will not be located outside the residential houses so will not cause that much inconvenience. In fact, living on North Cross Road, I can only suggest that it might make their street a little bit more interesting for residents than it is now.

Now I?ve had time to read the Bermondsey Street Report, it received 20 responses to the consultation. Half of these supported the scheme and there is only 1 (one) objection to the bars etc in the area.

No, you're not predicting, you are rumour spreading to stir up further feeling against Southwark Council, as do many of your posts. If you have any evidence that this is being proposed please supply proof other than the vague notion that Southwark Council supports a night time economy. In the case of the bars discussed in the Bermondsey Scheme, they have been there for a very long time. To compare the vibrancy of Bermondsey Street with Melbourne Grove is laughable.

Would it not be more appropriate to contact Thames Water?

Very strange. I?ve just called and those who are calling about a non urgent matter are invited to use the econsult online service.