Earl Aelfheah

How about Mercato Metropolitano?

Let's face it. The brextremists will never be happy, whatever the outcome - and they'll continue to blame everyone else for the countries ills, whatever they are.

Camberwell Green has horrendous pollution concentrations (plus a school, a hospital and a playground just off it). Closing Cambwerwell Grove adds to the problem, by forcing even more traffic through a massive bottleneck. Bit quieter for those living on Millionaires row though.

rendelharris Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > That's why an area wide strategy is required, > definitely just closing one road won't do it. But > once one road is closed, why not look at how the > additional traffic in other areas can be dealt > with by more road closures (as I suggested > earlier, for example, closing off some of the > toastrack roads to keep traffic on the main > arteries) rather than just campaigning to reopen > that road? All reopening Camberwell Grove bridge > will do is concentrate the impact of cars back in > that area, that won't lead to a change in car use > either. This is just not a sensible way to do things. It may be that closing Camberwell Grove to traffic can be justified as part of a Borough wide plan - but it seems unlikely imo, that an opportunistic intervention, driven by vested interests of a handfall of residents is likely to have chanced upon the best possible solution to traffic issues across the wider area. We need some proper analysis and a consideration of the knock on effects / impacts on traffic in the surrounding area of closing the road. Don't the council get paid to do this stuff?

wulfhound Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > But, the analogy is spot on. You just can't > bring yourself to admit you are anti-car, so you > make nebulous claims that you hate "hate their > lazy, selfish, unnecessary and inconsiderate use" > and drop in that you somehow are OK with "sensibly > used low emissions motor vehicles". I'm surprised > you didn't go the whole hog and slip in "well, > some of my best friends drive cars". > Just admit it - you are anti-car. You want to see > the bridge closed to traffic because you hate > cars. > > > How about anti-inappropriate-use-of-car? > > I don't hate cars, I think (as with opiate > painkillers, gas fired power stations and > warships) they're a useful tool for a specific > range of things. If you need to get a family of > four and a bunch of camping gear to some remote > part of Wales, for example, there's really no good > alternative. I've lived in places where your > quality of life without owning a motor vehicle > could accurately be described as sod-all. SE5 > isn't one of them. > > However, for moving people a few miles around a > densely populated city, they're simply the wrong > tool. Anti-social by design and by definition > (convertibles with the roof down aside), vastly > overweight and over-engineered and, as a direct > result, creating disproportionate danger, energy > waste and noise (all essentially facets of the > same thing). You simply don't need a 60 kilowatt > engine, 1.5 tonne chassis and motorway-grade > impact protection to move one or two people and a > few kilos of stuff a couple miles around a city. > Your average cyclist can probably sustain 500 > watts on a good day and 15mph average speed, which > is as quick as driving in London; for people who > can't or don't want to keep that up for an hour, > or have a young child or a small amount of work > gear to carry, electronic assist will do the > same. > > It's as if we all one day decided to use petrol > chainsaws for a bit of light gardening. There are > times and places where heavy, noisy and dangerous > power tools are the only practical way to get the > job done - but it's better for everyone (in a > densely populated city) if we use them as a last > resort. It's one thing to think that there should be a strategy for encouraging people out of cars (I'd agree) and another to just close one or two roads (regardless off the knock on effects). This is not going to lead to a step change in car use, it's just going to concentrate the impact of cars in certain areas.

Bored kids in provincial towns are as bad, if not worse.

Is Jeremy Bowen (BBC reporter) from ED? He posted a photo of what looked a bit like Melbourne Grove - could be wrong.

They're not going to say 'Trump rested his cup on the red button by mistake, you've all got 10 minutes left'.

The sky in Brighton is all post apocalyptic

ed_pete Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Does anyone know if this is still planned to go > ahead and if so when it is likely to be > implemented ? This is a good question. Anyone know the answer?

wulfhound Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So just to be clear, we mostly agree that traffic > is undesirable (even those who claim not to mind > it aren't exactly queueing up to encourage more on > their own road), and yet most people are unwilling > to cut back on contributing to said problem, or to > support measures encouraging or compelling others > to cut back? > > It's like complaining about the amount of litter > on the street yet being unwilling to inconvenience > yourself slightly to put your own rubbish in a > bin. No, it's like saying we all agree litter is a bad thing and if asked if we'd like to have it regularly removed from the street we live on, would probably say yes... Even when we suspected it was being dumped again in neighbouring roads. Because, given the choice we'd rather live on a clean street. In such a scenario however, you might expect council leaders to come up with a better plan, which take account of everyone.

.

fishbiscuits Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The Forresters wasn't that bad. "Scampi" and chips > with a pint of lager for a fiver, wasn't it? Or > thereabouts. > > You didn't have to join in with the fighting if > you didn't fancy it. You didn't have to join in with the fighting if you didn't fancy it? Yeah right. Unless you 'looked funny'.

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > uncleglen Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > hopefully the 2 teenagers will get some kind of > > education in the young offenders > > > They will probably be put on some Motor Cycle /Car > Repair course costing thousands of ????'s > > (Something decent kids Never get the opportunity > to do.) > > Give them Nothing. No point spending money on bad > 'Machines' They will just abuse it. > > DulwichFox I wish that were true (at least there'd be a chance of them doing something more productive when they get out). Sadly, I suspect they'll get an education in further barbarity and general criminality.

nxjen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I find it very bizarre that residents on a street > are even able to request that their road is closed > permanently to through traffic. See also Melbourne > Grove. This. If every street was given control of whether or not 'their' road should be open to traffic, then we'd have to ban cars from London entirely. It's the worst kind of nimbyism. The Council should make some strategic decisions based on what's in the wider interest of all their constituents. Not just cow tow to those with the loudest voices. Currently, there is a disproportionate amount of consideration given to people with clear, vested interests.

A terrible pastiche. So characterless.

:-(

Hit the nail on the head Loz. It's all fairly grim.

The bridge was only made 1-way because of structural issues. We were told at that time that the 1-way was only temporary. It later became permanent. Then it closed completely and we were told it would be reopened. Wonder what will happen? Network Rail have been allowed to get away with negligence for years as it's suited the council's agenda and the narrow interests of some vocal Grove residents. The consultation is irrelevant.

This road was 'temporarily' (the claim at the time) reduced to one way traffic as the result of Network Rail's negligence. Why aren't the council insisting that NWR do the repairs properly and fully and return the road to two way traffic as it is meant to be. Why wasn't this chased up as a matter of urgency years ago. Instead, it's been allowed to deteriorate further and now may never reopen, or at best, be returned to the 'temporary' state of one way traffic.

Absolutely ridiculous. It's taken years for Network Rail to 'fix' this, which actually they haven't (as it's still only able to accommodate 1-way traffic). They should be heavily fined for the disruption they've caused. The council shouldn't be consulting on whether the road should be partially opened. Ask any road's residents whether they'd like their street closed to traffic, and a large number will say yes. Clearly, those on the street are going to respond in the greatest numbers, skewing the likely outcome. It's a way for the Council to avoid making difficult decisions and avoiding accountability.

mrsparker Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ah I like that one, this is the one that irks me > > http://www.acorn.ltd.uk/property-for-sale/4-bedroo > m-house-in-landcroft-road-east-dulwich-se22-P21098 > 2/ Yep. Awful, awful design.

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I expect if you open one of those bins the smell > would be horrendous- so the person avoids it They shouldn't have a dog then.

Boris is a disgrace. there are plenty of politicians whose views I disagree with, but who I still respect. Boris however, believes in absolutely nothing, except Boris. The fact that he is still in such a prominent position just shows how broken our political culture has become. A man so unprincipled should have vanished from the political mainstream long ago.

The internet has led to everyone having far too much confidence in their own opinion. As Gove famously said, ?we?ve had enough of experts?. But of course it's delusional to think that some people's arguments should not hold more weight than others because they are more informed. The problem with the internet is that no matter how wrong your view, you can connect with whole communities of people who will validate your perspective. This is what leads to 'post truth' politics, to Trump, to Brexit. Very depressing. Best to get drunk and forget about it.