fazer71

I looked and looked but it's either more expensive or dull / boring with little potential, West Dulwich Forest Hill Honour oak would be my choice over Gangsataaa Nunhead. The old three property rules Location Location and Location. Every time?. East Dulwich is around ?500-?600 a sq ft. which compared to anywhere else with a heart looks like good value especially Paris where I?m also buying prices have gone totally potty.

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi Fazer71, > Trolleybuses are buses powered by electricity. > They have the cost structure of buses & trams but > without the mechanical efficiency of riding along > tracks. Wouldn?t the cost saving of not having to lay miles of track make trolley buses much much cheaper? No diesel makes them just as healthy as trams? I can?t see why they wouldn?t be the ideal cost efficient solution especially if they had onboard generators for parking so would not require a terminal yet another cost saving. Or is there something I?m missing here? Is it better to lay high maintenance high cost track and build a terminals etc etc is that what gets the money because there?s a higher profit margin for the contractors and it looks like a bigger high profile project. Or is there a visual problem with power lines running along streets? I can?t see any downside to trolleybuses in London. May European cities have them.

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What we really need is a tram service across > Southwark which is much more likely to persaude > car drivers onto them than buses have ever been > found to achieve.... I doubt car drivers will ever be persuaded to swap their cars for trams or buses. Who in their right mind would swap air-conditioned leather luxury for uncomfortable smelly armpit aggressively driven slow alternative? But if the money is there are it must be spent then?.. I think a trolleybus system would be the way to go not a tram system. No Rails so little disruption on the installation, which could all be carried out outside of rush hour to install the overhead cables, no need for years of road works as happened in Croydon and no rails to wear out. I think there?s system in Switzerland where the trolleybus runs on tyres and they are able to go onto rail sections for part of the route too. If there was any real willpower to improve public transport there?d be a tube line extension to Peckham rye and beyond. Regardless of the Bus verses Van and Cars public transport argument?.. Any junction which has lights which are phased to only allow 3 THREE cars though at a time is just plain Wrong. So the phasing at that Junction is completely wrong. If you can?t get that through to the people who can fix it please stop replying with it will be part of tens of thousand pound overhaul and car drivers should take the Ffuckingg bus argument. Because all that needs doing is make the light phasing twice as long as it is and the problem will be fixed for cars and busses??. No need to get on a bus or spend tens of thousands of TFL / Tax payer money to fix!!!!!!!!!!!!

the-e-dealer Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Buses carry more than 3 people and at the rush > hour are often full Genius!. Most cars 1 person > only. At rush hour that's true with full busses but still depends on the direction and whether it's morning or evening rush hour thing is even when it's not rush hour busses with 3 or 4 passengers cause the lights to slow to a standstill other traffic. Totally unnecessary to phase the lights at that junction to the advantage of the busses which already have priority on other traffic because of the bus lanes. Dangerous and frustrating for other traffic. There have never been tailbacks to goose green and never been problems there in the past! It's a simple cross road junction. Maybe it's the ridiculous pointless restrictions on left and right turns for various directions which have caused the problems. Regardless it doesn?t work unless you drive or are a passenger on a Bus. If you are on foot or a bike or in another vehicle you are FUCKED!

Ah that would explain why when a bus gets to the bus stop the lights stay green for much longer allowing the bus through and 6-7 cars, compared to when there?s no bus and only 3 can get through. So bus with 3 people onboard keeps 20+ cars waiting at the lights... Genius! So TFL not satisfied with having a bus lane also need to make the lights work in a ridiculous fashion when there are NO busses going through the junction!!!!!! It is the phasing which needs looking at. It?s a dangerous frustrating junction which is needlessly restricting the flow of regular traffic at NO benefit to the buses!!!! Can?t someone at Southwark talk to TFL about this? Edit to add Is it really necessary to renew the junction a great expense? That would be like replacing a car because it needs the carburettor adjusting Insane!!!!

dullified Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > We have just completed a side return extension > (Landells Road) which my boyfriend (a freelance > architect) designed and built himself. Like > snowboarder we didn't need planing permission as > it fell under permitted development (and yes the > rules have recently changed). Is it still possible to build a side extension under permitted development ? I spoke to an architect who said only rear extension is possible under permitted development a side extension needs planning permission ...

I don't know anything it's just that... From memory it was only a couple of year ago that that junction was renewed with drop downs and pedestrian lights etc ? etc 10?s of thousands spent I guess?.. I can?t understand why it would need replacing now? There was a time when traffic lights had a life span of 25-35 years now it?s only 2-4 years and the crossing is ripped up and the lights are replaced. If that doesn?t look very dodgy then I don?t know what does?.. I'd say if it makes no sense then something dodgy is probably going on. The awful thing is that incompetence or dodgy practice may cause another ?bad? accident at that junction, or a case of bad road rage. When it was a free junction with no left and right turn restrictions there were never any queues it just worked, ever since the "improvements" it's become a slow danger.

I think if they could phase the lights to allow more than three cars through at a time that which would not be double the time maybe 1/3 longer to get twice the cars through then the problem would be resolved for ever. Might this be a case of the phasing being intentionally setup wrong? It looks as though there is little need to spend tens of thousands on replacing something which just needs setting up correctly? Contract making a job for them selves? I can?t believe southwark highways would be in the pocket of the contractor ?that could never happen?? ;-) ..

Hi James I?ve noticed that the phasing of traffic lights on Peckham Rye is at times completely wrong this causes unnecessary long tailbacks along east Dulwich road which in turn causes many drivers to get frustrated, road rage is becoming a problem I?ve witnessed several instances. This appears to have become a problem since the very sad fatal accident and the unnecessarily long road works at that time which also caused much needless frustration and may have been a contributing factor in that accident it?s never been fluid since then. Is there anything that can be done?

the-e-dealer Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Why not knock on the alleged offender's door or > pop a note through the door? Why cause council > expense? Tried that. They were very rude told me to mind my own business they have no intention of cutting it back 2ft+ over the pavement and 3 ft into the neighbour?s garden works for them. I wish I hadn't and I'd just reported it because now when the council do contact them they will guess ?correctly? it was me who reported.

MrBen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Fazer's worst nightmare = dinner with Kevin > McCleod. At Rocca. OMG yep a complete nightmare. On ... be little women...... Hetro Homo Lesbo we can?t help flirting with the ones we fancy stick to what you like to get a hold of as opposed to what makes you feel uncomfortable and is a turn off. I like women; I?d be flirting with the women happy to be surrounded by women. But there?s Gok Wan ?totally brilliant, positive personality and charm? that rule doesn?t seem to apply to him. He just flirts with everyone.

Hi James Do you know what the rules are re overhanging bushes over pavements? A few houses have bushes which take up to ? of the pavement some even when trimmed back. I looked at the Southwark web site and called but got nowhere.

Wotsits always do it for me. RosieH Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Ahem...: > > Even calling McCloud a mincing Gay because that?s > how he comes across it's a commonly held > impression of other viewers. ?See online > comments?. Yes exactly I said .. Even calling McClown a ........ But I didn?t call him one did I? The clue is in the "Even". I called him a mincing @#$%&. Later I wrote ?Even, as in ?Even IF I had called him a? ?. Which I clearly did not. I can see I?m not going to get an apology, because you don?t get it don?t understand and don?t realise what you?re reading or writing. An apology is beyond you. I apologise to every one who?s had to put up with me explaining why I?m incensed at the disgraceful behaviour I have received. Am I kidding? No Did I start out kidding?

RosieH Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think Sue, that when Fazer called Kevin McCloud > "a mincing gay" and suggested that because he's a > mincing gay he hates women (like all mincing gays, > we can only assume), and we suggested that was > nonsensical and homophobic, we are somehow > trolling. Rather than picking someone up on an > appalling and bigoted world view. > > I can't work out if this is an elaborate trolling > exercise in and of itself, or just the rantings of > someone without the faintest trace of > self-awareness. There you go again! Writing rubbish. I said ?I avoid everything he?s in because he?s a mincing @#$%& who makes the whole process appear to be even more difficult and awkward that it needs to be. ? I didn?t say "mincing gay" it was mincing @#$%&. Even having been married twice with lots of kids he could still be described as a mincing @#$%&. Plenty of straight men mince, just like McClown. So he?s a mincing straight man, who has little time for women.

El Pibe Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Do what you will with the rest of us, but poke > your ire at forum nobility like PGC at your own > peril. > I'd set your fazer to charm if I were you young > man. Is this online. Lord of the flies. ?

Peckhamgatecrasher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > fazer71, stop being a dick, Nice charming now I?m a ?dick? could have been a Dick or a DICK or silly or ott. But no I?m just a little dick. The trolling crew??. monniemae RosieH El Pibe Otta Jeremy + Peckhamgatecrasher > Worse things happen at sea or even closer to home. This is a forum.... > Your schoolboy whinge is really pissing me off. Your school days are obviously still alive in you. > For the record, I like Kevin McCloud. No shit Sherlock I don't think that you insulting me and joining the trolling crew would have left anyone in any doubt that you're a McClown groupie of the same mindset and manner. I?m fairly certain you won?t take that as an insult but I apologise if you do.

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Fine, I absolutely stand by everything I've said > on this thread, and will be judged by it. Now > could you shut up and stop using the forum for you > self obsessed nonsense. You just don't get it do you. Here is an example of an acceptable apology. (I?m sorry slipped up there I apologise for directing that at you.) A simple one liner just 12 words. I?m not using this forum or thread for anything other that airing my views and opinions. Often I don?t expect many to agree with me even so just like any other member of this forum I don?t expect to be directly insulted for my views. I attempt to add a little humour but never at the expense of other members. Why would I lower myself to belittling another member when I can just say what I think about the subject, there?s nothing to be gained from the taunting or ridicule of members of the forum as there are far better buffoons and incompetents who like McClown have (in spite of themselves) appeared in the limelight and make such excellent fodder.

Trouble is this isn't school is it? It's a public online forum and you can been seen for what you are.

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > " Why have I touched a nerve, can you see how > you?ve abused me??" > > No, but if I have abused you, I genuinely couldn't > care less, you act like a stroppy child. Oh OK now I'm a stroppy child. What next you Bully. You just can't help yourself you just continue to abuse me with your posts, every one has been an insult directed towards me insult after insult.

You guys R a right bunch. It's ok for you to insult me. Ok for you to call me homophobic Ok for you to call me an idiot. Ok for you to question my intellect. BUT it?s Not ok for me to be negative and abrupt ? Double standards and disgusting! Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > No. Now give it a rest. Nice you abuse me and then try and calm me down. GIVE IT A REST Why have I touched a nerve, can you see how you?ve abused me?? El Pibe Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > IF you look up troll, weirdly the definintion > isn't > "someone who doesn't like me" It?s someone who insults someone else online and that is exactly what you did. > likewise that of bully isn't > "someone who disagrees with me" But you didn't disagree with me you insulted me saying I was trolling. > now wipe the spittle flecks from your lips, have a > nice cup of tea and start again, there's a good > fellow ;) Who do you think you are winking at me as if it?s all ok. You need to watch what you direct at others. Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > fazer, the problem is that you come across as > overwhelmingly negative and excessively abrupt. > You reap what you sow. Does that apply to McMisery of Grand Designs then? If it does he?s fair game and what I?ve said is totally acceptable. I didn?t sow anything in your direction so why did you insult me? RosieH Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hahaha - yes, yes, yes - THIS! > Also, fazer, I certainly wasn't trolling before, I > was just flabbergasted at your blatant homophobia. > I thought it was something people kept a dirty > little secret these days, rather than paraded in > full public view. But seeing as you've asked... > > What Pibe said!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am not homophobic you accused me of being homophobic. That?s not an argument I wish to have, so thinking my post might be misconstrued I edited it and you used my edit as leverage to say I was. I was and still am totally disgusted at your post. Yes I?m Mr Angry ?Alf Garnet? Fazer. But I never ever direct any insults at any individual on this forum ever. Unlike you lot I have nothing to apologise for . GO back through this thread look at your posts and see what a bunch of disgusting trolls you all are.

So far I?ve been insulted by the following on this thread. The trolling crew??. monniemae RosieH El Pibe Otta Jeremy Will any of you appologise or retract your pointed comments and insults directed at me?

If Charlie Luxton had a program it would be worth watching, unlike McClown who's sold his soul. Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > fazer71 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > leave you feeling like you wish > > you hadn?t bothered. > > > > Garbage. > > Pretty much like all of your posts, then. I C U have joined the trolling crew. Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > For the record fazer, I never called you an idiot > because of your views on the programme or it's > presenter. Really well it didn't appear that way..

If Charlie Luxton had a new show and he was given a decent budget it would probably be worth watching. He's a man of principles and would never stoop to making a doom and gloom shite. unlike McTurd. How McTurd look himself in the mirror I don't know. Arsholetecht.

Both have similarities.... Cheap to produce lacking in anything which would be good for you, leave you feeling like you wish you hadn?t bothered. Garbage.

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If thinking you're acting like an idiot is being a > troll, then make room under the bridge for me. Calling me an idiot because I don?t like Misery man Kevin McCloud. I would accept. What is unacceptable is jumping on a troll bandwagon joining fools who don?t even know when they are trolling, by laughing and making other snide comments intended to directly insult me. Should I excuse myself for.... disliking a program and its presenter because I find it uninspiring an insult to my intelligence, lightweight and a total waste of time. Even calling McCloud a mincing Gay because that?s how he comes across it's a commonly held impression of other viewers. ?See online comments?. Gays call each other Miserable Mincing Gays. As I witnessed whilst working on a project at a Paris fashion house. You?re double standards make me sick! An apology and retraction would not have made you a troll. But oh Noooo you just couldn?t help yourself by joining in. McCloud groupies must = trolls because that?s the negative mindset he projects with his snide comments his followers are obviously of the same sad mindset. Utter shite.