flocker spotter

is this spam?

cidered Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So? Do we know what the new shop is going to be? Yes, but will wait for a formal annoucement I would hazard a guess that it may not exactly be welcomed by some other NCR & environs business

The leggings over the calf suggest outdoor stuff- Would suggest a central European tram / bus/ taxi driver of some kind

.

This is possibly the most ill thought through idea I have ever seen on this forum

oh

There has been a lot of bee activity in and out of our compost bin and we fear there might be a nest in there. What should we do about it? I am concerned about the potential danger.

I beg to differ - American Tabloid takes the biscuit with regard to JFK

now all we need in this thread is mention of: 1) Fractional reserve banking 2) Protocols of the elders of Zion 3) some comment about how often the #13 shows up on the USD bill 4) Israeli national warned about 9-11 and we have the set.

yum yum I vote for waitrose when do we find out who the winner is ? does anyone know what site is being used for this - I would suggest the Co-op location would be ideal

Crikey - this is now up to 48 pages. That shows how contentious this issue is. And much of this is because the consultation and the area involved was too limited. Driving passed the Dulwich Leisure Centre the other night I noticed how congested parking was in the surrounding area. Those close to North Cross Road suffer at weekends with shopper parking. The fact is car ownership greatly exceeds places to park. We live in a Victorian built area - if a house is divided into 2 flats, there will not be sufficient space for both residents of that building to park outside. Congestion is to be expected and tolerated. Choosing a select few streets to look at commuter parking is a rather short-sighted view considering the total congestion in the area. The consultation should be re-done considering the whole area - and a view of all residents across the whole area taken into account. Only then can a clear picture be formed rather than a knee-jerk reaction to a few vocal residents.

Several years ago we took our two year old skiing with MW. The nannies were excellent and he was happy in the creche. They had a number of large wheeled buggies so will be able to help you there. They provide microwaves for warming milk or baby food and we could use these any time of day. Take nappies and wipes - choice is limited in resort. The change in altitude affected our son's appetite but the food was good. We hired a toboggan to take him out in the snow including pulling him around the town.

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > New proposed cycle contraflows along Copleston and > Oglander to fit with new junction with Grove > Vale. > I'm really chuffed that I suggested these > contraflow as part of the changes to Grove Vale > and they're now happening. > > Please see attached for plans - look at the > bottom. So how will you mark the cycle lanes? Copleston will have marked bays as part of the CPZ, but the equazlly congested Oglander is by some travisty outside the consultation but is equally congested.

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > New proposed cycle contraflows along Copleston and > Oglander to fit with new junction with Grove > Vale. > I'm really chuffed that I suggested these > contraflow as part of the changes to Grove Vale > and they're now happening. > > Please see attached for plans - look at the > bottom. Shame you could not have got Oglander included in the CPZ consultation - as you seem to acknowledge it's link to Grove Vale and proximity to Copleston that is in it.

[i]Posted by: mastershake Today, 10:20AM just on the topic of those who disbelieve that commuter traffic is a problem. I live in a road immediately adjacent to the current proposed CPZ. This morning at 7am there were 5 spaces on our road. Just coming and going, I noticed that all were taken in the subsequent hour. Of these, 4 were taken by people dressed in suits, who proceeded to walk in the direction of the station; one person seemed to be walking, dressed for work, in the direction of the hospital. Now there are no spaces on the road at all. I have no idea why people drive to park near east dulwich station - maybe they're lazy, maybe they're trying to save on rail fares, maybe it's close to their children's school - but they do it and it is a problem.[/i][pre] [/pre] I have quoted this post because it demonstrates that the concept of commuter parking is heresay - rather than any proper study of commuter habits. As the above post comments - suit plus car shortly after 7am = commuter. What about the teachers at Goose Green school, for example? Teachers are usually in by 7:30 and would all be eligible for permits anyway. There seems to be no concept of non-residents have a valid community reason to park. So in response to I don't know why people drive to ED station - the chances are very few do. All this CPZ does is make money for the council. It does nothing for our community. And therefore is of no value to ED.

I am delighted to see Mr Barber engaging with this issue. I live on Oglander in the triange off Grove Vale that is not included in the scheme. As such I am extremely concerned that our local streets will become a community car park making it impossible for residents to park anywhere. We won't be able to park in our street because it will be the only place in the area with unrestricted parking - but we won't be able to park in our neighbouring streets either because they will be for residents only. I think it is truly shocking that people affected by the scheme by proximity have not been inlcuded in the consultation. Given the choice of paying for residents parking permits and losing the chance to park near my house, I would prefer the former.

As an Oglander resident, I am appalled at this. Parking in our road is bad enough. If we get all the cars that can't park in neighbouring streets, where are the residents to park? We won't even be able to park in the streets nearby as they will be part of the CPZ, which we won't be in. What an appallingly ill-thought-out proposal!

How about the already approved Michaela Free School which has just lost a site in lambeth?

This school has just lost it's proposed premises at the Old Lilian Bayliss site. Sold to a developer instead. How a council can sell a school site to anything other than a school when there is such a shortage of places, i do not know.

http://www.davidicke.com/ headcase central - ideal reading for those who take this toss seriously

Don't forget to take a baby car seat. Hire co.s charge a fortune and generally don't stock baby seats.

it is not a banksy

I think these people have just been to our door. Now beginning of July. Has the sponsored walk moved date? Now saying Rosendale School is organising it so quite easy to check it out. Did not give them money up front....

Mick Mac Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Teachers. Work shorter hours than everyone else. > Get more holidays than everyone else. Get paid > ffrom start date until death with their pay going > down slightly after retirement but increasing > again with inflation until death. Then spouse > pension takes over ;) . > > Hoot if you agree.;-) How do you work out that teachers work shorter hours? Most teachers are in school by 7.30. They leave around 6pm and will still have a couple of hours planning and marking to do after that? Teachers typically work about a 60 hour week. Teaching is also a physically and mentially demanding job. If firemen, soldiers or the police were asked to do front line work until the age of 66, there would be a public out-cry! Get your facts straight before you make such naive claims.

glamping glasto wellie wearing scum.