Earl Aelfheah

More covered, secure bike parking near people's homes and at public transport destination would get. Lot more pool cycling than tinkering with road layouts. Why can't you park a bike safely at Brixton, our nearest tube for example?

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > rahrahrah Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > The new flats are likely to be more commercial > > (i.e empty investment vehicles) than truly > > residential. > > While it's common knowledge that some investors > leave their investment properties empty > (particularly Chinese who don't want their > property to become "second hand"), I don't think > this is the norm. That is true, but there is occupied and occupied. I would bet that the type of 'luxury' 1 and 2 bed flats which will no doubt go up will be either someone's pied-?-terre (so empty at weekends), or else buy to let investments offering the usual insecure, overpriced and unequal tenant/landlord relationships. It's not what Londoners need imo. But it is what speculators and developers want, so lot's of Londoner's money will be poured into it regardless.

bil Wrote: If there were some > innovative plans to regenerate OKR area like > Techcity or kings cross I would feel less > disappointed. In reality it's likely there will > be numerous expensive blocks of flats like > Bermondsey spa and what's happening along new kent > road/walworth road. Exactly this.

I can't follow this. Have they broken planning permission? If so, what happens next?

Yep, agree with that.

Looking at the crash map it seems that two areas of concern are Chadwick Road (where it crosses Bellenden) and peckham road at the crossing from Lyndhurst Road to and from Kelly avenue. I'm not shocked. The former, I can't see anyone being able to do much about. In my experience a lot of vehicles will see bikes and dash out in front of them regardless, because they don't want to be held up, or simply for sport. This is about education more than road layout in my opinion. There are a number of drivers who will go out of their way to cut up cyclists and this is a classic spot for the belligerent Top Gear watching van driver. The second 'hotspot' could do with some attention - the crossing between Lyndhurst and Kelly Avenue. I believe it's outside the scope of this consultation though.

This all sounds rather positive. So is the Elephant 'fixed' now?

There are a lot of necessary restrictions. There should be more short stay (30min) parking.

You do occasionally get drivers coming out of Chadwick Road, cutting across cyclist travelling down Bellenden (usually idiots doing it quite intentionally). Agree that the surface on Lyndhurst is terrible and as said it's difficult to cross from and to Kelly Ave. to join the quietway. Otherwise, it seems OK cycling around Bellenden.

Is this related to the accident on Dunstans / underhill, or another one?

Sorry to hear about your experience Amy, I hope you can put it behind you. Glad everyone's OK.

Thanks for the update James

What would make the biggest single difference for lot's of cyclists already using this route daily, is a safer way to cross Peckham Road between Kelly Avenue and Lyndhurst Way.

Sorry for typos, on my phone

Yes, this is why it would probably involve closing LJ. Lambeth politicians are t going to support this as it disadvantages their constituents disproportionately

What was the Strategic Rail Authority at the time, did I believe, agree to reopen the station on the proviso that it would mean the closure of Loughborough station. The council wouldn't agree to this so it didn't happen.personally I thought that was a mistake at the time, as LJ is very close to both Brixton aoverground and underground station and those to the northwould be ceithin walking distance of Camberwell. To have the Thameslink serve Camberwell (a major town centre) makes more sense. I suspect similar conditions would be applied by Network rail even if they were willing to revisit this. With all the developments happening around Camberwell green and along the Thmes,ink line generally, I am surprised that section 106 conditions haven't been used to see he station funded.

Dan Rigby Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Paul and I would like to thank you all for the > nice comments. We opened in 2003 and loved every > minute of it. We cleared out the last of the > equipment today and took the letters down. A sad > day but Seacow will always live on, but only in > fields. All the best, Dan Sorry to see the Seacow closing, wish you all the best.

I heard it's going to be a new shop called 'The Chalk Block'

The new flats are likely to be more commercial (i.e empty investment vehicles) than truly residential.

how many threads?!

.

It has 'sh*t' sprayed across the ankle of one of the fighters. I only saw it recently, but it may have been there for some time. It hasn't been fixed.

The problem is BNG that the existing lines are all fragmented, suburban rail franchises. The chances of them being integrated and run in the interests of anyone other than Kent commuters is unlikely whilst the current model continues (if they're bought under the control of TFL then we may see them more aligned with the needs of inner London). This is why we need a high frequency, dedicated urban railway (aka the tube).

healey Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Camberwell badly needs a tube link. There is no money for existing communities in the transport budget under Johnson. Unless public money can be used to line the pockets of property developers it aint being invested in infrastructure.

The fighters next to the EDT. Some idiot sprayed an expletive across the bottom of it.