Earl Aelfheah

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This is so tedious. If they really wanted to > improve the health of the area then they would > close some streets off to traffic in order to > create cycle routes into town, invest in secure > cycle parking at all tube stations, invest in > local public transport. But they won't. They'll > bring in CPZs, continue to approve drop kerbs and > the concreting over of gardens and put in more and > more speed bumps (adding to pollution). None of > these things decrease local car ownership, or > improve the environment. ... oh, and completely fail to police commonplace, dangerous driving.

This is so tedious. If they really wanted to improve the health of the area then they would close some streets off to traffic in order to create cycle routes into town, invest in secure cycle parking at all tube stations, invest in local public transport. But they won't. They'll bring in CPZs, continue to approve drop kerbs and the concreting over of gardens and put in more and more speed bumps (adding to pollution). None of these things decrease local car ownership, or improve the environment.

We need some actual traffic enforcement officers to nick these eejits. Instead we just get more speed bumps.

Which Waitrose?

L.

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > As the council is effectively privatising pieces > of the street for individuals who want to use it > for long term car storage - will those without > cars also be able to pay a small annual fee for a > section of street - perhaps to turn it into > a green space / garden area? ...after all the CPZ is definitely about healthy streets and not about making it easier to keep a car.

So many of these types of stories on the forum.

There's now an Everyman in Crystal Palace too. Personally, I like to watch a film without the distraction of people talking / mucking about, so would pay extra to avoid the nonsense that people describe as taking place in the plex.

As the council is effectively privatising pieces of the street for individuals who want to use it for long term car storage - will those without cars also be able to pay a small annual fee for a small section of street - perhaps to turn it into a green space / garden area?

Sorry to hear about your car. It's amazing that keyless entry systems have such a glaring security flaw. I would have thought the manufacturers must have some liability here? Anyway, I hope you get the vehicle back.

What I cannot see from the Southwark Spine consultation, is whether there will be any changes to make it easier to cross from Kelly Avenue to Lyndhurst Way? It is pretty difficult currently.

mikeb Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Those are pretty cynical proposals. I do wish they > would stop calling a path ?a public realm? or > ?linear park?. > > Why are we planning to give a property developer a > windfall from rezoning public land? Southwark > Council already did this in the 1990s when they > last approved the redevelopment of DHFC?s ground, > and a reduction in local green space. How many > times do we need to do this? until there is none > left? > > By covenant, in the control of Southwark Council, > the land for the ground can only be used for > sporting and recreational purposes. I don?t even > know why we are contemplating changing this. It > only gives Meadow more hope that they will > succeed. We may as well be discussing the > redevelopment of Goose Green. > > While we?re at it, St Francis?s Park - which is > the main community improvement from the last > redevelopment - just shows how cynical this whole > business is. I can?t think of a less appealing > local park, or one which is looked after with less > love. Even Nunhead Green is now a more pleasant > place to spend time. This ^

How many times have the council pushed for a CPZ over the years? Each time it?s rejected by the majority of residents and each time they come back. It is inevitable that the council will eventually get their way and the whole of ED will end up a CPZ. If you introduce parking restrictions on a small number of streets, traffic gets displaced and impacts neighbours. It will expand over time. When will the council put as much time, effort and money into pursuing positive measures at reducing traffic in the form of better public transport / alternatives to car ownership?

Deleted. Sorry, unnecessarily grumpy.

Southeast London is behind the rest of the Capital when it comes to regular 'turn up and go' metro style services, so i don't think we should just be thankful for what we've got.

Last time this was proposed, Grayling blocked it on political grounds: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tfl-railway-london-overground-expansion-chris-grayling-letter-leaked-a7460586.html

I too am fairly sceptical about this happening. Don't get me wrong, it would be great and would demonstrate a commitment to spending public money on serving the public... the thing is that all evidence to date, especially when it comes to transport, is for an appetite to use our taxes for schemes which enrich shareholders. Without some serious private interests, I think it's unlikely.

Email showing consistent lead in the polls for almost a year now:

carlafindle Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ...the horror. That's a nice response. Perhaps the OPs husband would like to go about his business without being harassed. Doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

My wife was bitten in a shop by a dog last week. The owner justified this, by saying, 'he is very bitey'. Unfortunately, many dog owners are completely relaxed about the antisocial behaviour of their pampered pooches.

malumbu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > REMOANERS are self serving, arrogant parasites who > make no meaningful contribution to life in the UK That would be most of London, Scotland and N. Ireland then?!

teddyboy23 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Polls don't mean nothing polls said trump wouldnt > win polls said remain would win the first > referendum then may was told she would win a > majority government etc etc A vote on the final deal might help clear things up.

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > rahrahrah Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > 28% of D&WN voters have now signed the > petition. > > Getting ever closer to 5 million. > > https://www.livefrombrexit.com/petitions/241584 > > > Only another 12.4 million to go then. Could always have a people?s vote and see whether the polls (which have been showing a consistent and significant majority now for remain) are right or not. After all ?will of the people? and all that

28% of D&WN voters have now signed the petition. Getting ever closer to 5 million. https://www.livefrombrexit.com/petitions/241584

27% of voters in Dulwich and West Norwood have signed the petition. Let?s get that higher.