spanglysteve

I tweeted Ottolenghii earlier and they confirmed that's it's not them.

So as it stands at the moment, it could be a Waitrose, M&S or Iceland???? Let the forum meltdown commence!

Renata, Today when using this junction, I noticed that while the north/south traffic goes at the same time, the est/west traffic continues to be separated. I thought the East/west phase was only split as part of the "temporary" phasing. So it would appear that after all this disruption, and who knows how much money we have been left with essentially exactly the same as what we had before. Yet more indication that the only point of these works was to spend surplus budget before the year end. This entire incident has been farce from start to end with blame equally shared between the council and the contractors. I look forward to not voting for you in 2014.

This whole insurance thing makes no sense to me. How does "Under-insurance" work. If I have ?40k of possession and only insure upto ?20k, surely that means any claim should be limited to ?20k, that way its my loss if ?40k is stolen. What @rseholes!

Does this mean the bus stop is now open?

The only good thing about this thread is that it has finally pushed me into getting contents cover, something I had been meaning to do for ages but kept forgetting about!

Girl82 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Argh - so we have to suffer this for over another > week? PLEASE tell me there are no more works > planned after March 15th. I and many other > residents are at the end of our tether. Dont worry, I'm sure this will be the last of the works. By the time they are finished it will be April so the Council will be past its annual "sh*t-its-March-and-we-have-not-spent-all-our-budget-so-lets-just-splurge-it-all-on-completely-unnecessary-expensive-projects-that-represent-no-value-for-money" mode.

Renata, Just so we are clear here, the works which were scheduled to take 3 weeks are actually taking (at least) 5 weeks, a whole 66% longer than planned. I would therefore presume that the Council will be imposing a fine the contractors for this? May I also ask who is responsible for monitoring the contractors. How can it be acceptable for such long delays to incur? In addition, how on earth does it take 5 weeks to replace one set of lights on a not-very-busy junction. How on earth did we ever build a road system!?!

Renata, as no one appears to have received official notice of this further attempt by southwark to ensure that all it's road budget is expended by April, please could you inform which bus stops will be closed as a result? Regards,

Deleted, posted in wrong forum

I use it and even in my lower ground flat I get a strong 3G signal.

It's not the roadworks that people are getting upset about, but rather the needless waste of resources. Replacing fully functioning lights with some different lights which are apparently "better". The point being made was that the junction was working fine as it was. There was no need to waste money which could have been spent on more important issues elsewhere within the borough.

Bic Basher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > although it could > become a high-profile seat if Labour put in a > name. This is a possibility given that labours current majority is over 30,000 against their nearest rival.

Renata, Again I can not agree with you. What do you mean by "they had outlived their life span"? Were they dead? No they were functioning perfectly fine. I have no recollection of any failures in the lights. I suspect you mean that they have been fully depreciated and therefore you assume that to mean that they therefore need to be replaced? Most people tend to keep things until the cost of maintenance exceeds the cost of replacement. They don't get rid of them simply because they have finished paying for them! Next you state that these new flexible lights should be better for both pedestrians and motorists. Better than what exactly. I have previously asked you how many people complained to you about the "temporary" nature or phasing of these lights. Your silence on this leads me to believe that no-one made any complaints. Therefore what is the justification in spending money on what is a fairy minor junction? I can only think its because there was unspent cash in the current years budget and the council were frantically trying to find anything to spend it on to ensure their budget was not reduced in subsequent years. STOP WASTING OUR MONEY!!! ........................................ Edited to correct typos

I completely agree with neilson99. Renata, please an you explain how much correspondence you have received about this junction prior to the consultation happening and it's nature. I can't believe you received many complaints about this temporary setup. I can not believe that there is no way to reprogramme the existing lights without ripping them out and replacing them with something similar. If you want to understand why we no longer trust our politicians and councillors it's because you sanction spend on such unnessesary works and then dont even try to hide the fact that you are pretty much admit on a public forum that the real driver is a "use it or lose it" situation. News flash, if you don't use all your budget in the course of the year it means you had too much to begin with. You are extremely misguided if you feel this issue is important against all other competing demands for for finite public cash. Thank the heavens I did not vote for your disgraceful administration!

This is sad to hear. I too am on Underhill Road. A good way to be vigilant is to install timers on your lights as this acts as a very good deterrent. I would also reccommend a sensor light. Hope they catch the burglers.

Anyone want to translate ojito's posts for me as they do not make any sense!

Why do southwark seem to hate motorists so much? http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/163786

Yes well done to all those busy-body nimbys who oppose good community pubs in the area. You guys seriously need to get a grip. The pub had been there for over 100 years, so lets face facts, you chose to move next to a pub, not the other way around. That you now complain about noise shows you to be pretty naive.Was 2130 really that late?

benmorg Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Rather than axing the Denmark [Hill] to London > Bridge rail service and spending millions on a > tram, at great inconvenience to motorists and > buses, why not simply keep the rail service? This point exactly. The South London line already connects the two hospitals. Why spend millions builing a new unnesecary tram link. If Edinburgh Trams has taught us anything, it is that you can in no way build a tram for ?55m. The link below shows that a similar project in Preston has a budget of at least ?86m. ?55m would bearly cover professional fees and the required utilities diversions. http://blogpreston.co.uk/2011/11/plans-for-preston-tram-remain-on-track-despite-funding-blow/

is this a joke, there isnt even a McD's in ED

maybe i'm being naieve, but surely if it gets rejected for planning, the developers will simply ammend it based on the reason for rejection?

When I was a student in Glasgow I was borrowing my dads jeep and had it parked outside my flat. Someone broke in and stole nothing except a big catering size tub of Jellybelly jelly beans despite it having an amazing radio that we had spent a bit of money on. We concluded that it was simply students high on something who got the munchies!

What razors said

If you had asked me previously, I would have said I was in favour of this extension. However, upon relfection I think this would be a costly mistake. The overground extends to Peckham Rye later this year. Therefore, those wanting to make a connection to it from the 63/363 will be able to in less than a years time. To buy more busses and employ more people, and do more feasability studies to resolve a problem which will not exist in less than a year seems wasteful.