fazer71

Abe_froeman 100% agreed. Planning is all about getting local votes for local MPs Local MPs would vote against anything in planning if they sniff a vote. It's a scandal the system is biased towards nimbi's ... And that's a big reason we don't have enough homes in London !

Zebedee I?m a humanist not political and happy to attack any political party. Politicians of all sides have done terrible things from Attlee's post war starvation rationing madness to Thatcher?s attempted poll tax the lists are long they are all capable of inhumane stupidity. I don?t subscribe to punishment the idea of taxing unoccupied land makes little sense, far better to use a carrot rather than a stick. In the UK house building is geared to only work for large corporations. Ho many of us know anyone who has built their own home (ie bought a plot of land and got a company in to build a house)? In Europe individuals build their own homes all the time in the UK it?s a handful of large property companies who build all the new homes. The problems we have in are caused by a planning system which panders to the nimby political nonsense also has a poor plan and doesn?t work to make the best use of the existing housing stock also by the debt mortgage system which gives too much to some and not enough to others. There are other factors like the large land owning families and historical poor development large footprint used for small houses in the 30?s ie one house built where the Victorians would have built two. Penguin68 Councils and councillors only care about keeping power they don't give a damn about making things better unless it gets them a vote. which is why nimby's rule .

James I disagree. The planning system is constantly restricting applications and the supply of homes. My uncle has a house which would have been able to be split into 3 flats, now with the new planning rules is can only be split into two flats. So there will be one less home!!! That?s a huge reduction in use of the existing housing stock crazy.. We want more homes and the planning system now allows 33 % fewer ! Housing associations are given planning for huge developments which would make sense for other developers, but other developers are simply not allowed to same privilege. Land banking isn't a problem in Southwark ? it is only an issue where no one wants to live! Can you show any land banking sites in Southwark? or within the M25 for that matter . ?? Thankfully there is an appeals system to deal with the restrictions and refusals the councils make !!!!!! Without the appeals system everything would grind to a stop and nothing would allowed. We?d be build one new home a year.! I find your views on planning totally bizarre but as you are a local councillor I am not surprised there is nothing in our system which would make you want to increase the housing stock and everything which would make you side with nimby?s and tiny weeny development ? As I explained in my previous post local authority?s and councillors are the main reason we have high house prices and are short on homes.

The planning system is overly complicated it appear to be designed for the creation of jobs in planning above the provision new homes. Bonkers! This is an example of what happens, when you develop a system which is open to abuse and misinterpretation. It results in delays in development expensive housing poor use of existing housing stock. Boris hasn?t made things better, Labour over 13years in power did nothing. The UK?s nutty Housing supply and the associated nutty conversation. Social housing must be a part of all new developments. This is a mad policy restricting supply of new homes it creates a two tier market Developers avoid building more than x number of homes to get under the requirement ? utterly Bonkers!! Stick rather than Carrot we know stick never works. The UK needs more homes we should have simple planning rules as they do in much of Europe then maybe house prices would be lower and rents would be lower as there would be more supply. Only housing associations benefit from lax planning they are allowed to build at twice or more the volume and far higher density than other builders with a virtual carte balanche from Local authority planners and councillors. Social housing has become an evil which now supports high rents in the private housing sector it restricts supply of new homes and creates a skewed false relationship between demand and supply in prime locations. Right to buy According to some is bad ?it reduces the number of homes... ?? How does it reduce the number of homes do these homes disappear from the UK?s housing stock in some magical way? No they simply end up in the ownership of those who cherish and maintain their homes. Compare that to abused social housing which tax payers end up fixing expensively until the next tenants trashing! Right to buy takes homes away from incompetent management by local authorities which is great! Local authorities have crooked and incompetent employees who waste hundreds of millions of tax payer?s money on substandard repairs and maintenance. I know this first had from Southwark my freeholder, the ?contractor? charged me and you the tax payer ?44,000 for ?7,000 worth of repairs! Insane but true! Ahh the NIMBY?s .. Pandered to by local councillors who want the nimby vote so interfere with the planning system at every opportunity. Nimby?s only exist because they are indulged by these local politicians who will do anything to get a vote. I hear green party councillors have vote against planning applications which would build more efficient homes or make better use of existing buildings! Utterly Bonkers. Yes our housing system is broken? totally broken ... by local misgovernment. and vote chasing ! Insane.

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi Fazer71, > I think adding another floor to the Iceland/M&S > site would be potentially an over development. It > would potentially have serious overlooking of > other neighbours. > It would also be an abuse of the planning process > to develop this site in a piece meal way to avoid > planning obligations. > > You're obviously much more economically liberal > than me on how East Dulwich is developed. James I'm realist. We need more homes a lot more homes! Compared to North London South London has very low buildings and a far lower density so we are a long long way from overdevelopment. 5 floors is acceptable cities across Europe have 5 floor buildings from before the invention of the lift. I have never understood the overlooking argument if a property is currently overlooked by 1 person at 1st floor level what changes when it's overlooked by 4 more floors ?? Nothing ! The crazy British planning system and everyone moans about the lack of homes and the high prices ... Insane

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The current residences at this property did not > have planning permission. > If they get planning permission for the two flats > on additional floor they'll then apply to convert > the offices into flats. Such conversions the gov't > has issues guidance are allowed and nearly nothing > councils can do to stop them. > The result in 10 residential properties. Normally > social housing is required for development of over > 9 homes. So they'll have side stepped this. > > Cllr Rosie Shimell and I are calling this in. Good work by the government there. Apparently we need more homes and that's a policy which will deliver not hinges. Excellent.

Otta you're a disgrace. Insulting me and belittle me with your playground bullying language. Gutter post very low indeed. Very sad I must be on the receiving end of your vile post.

The deadline for moronic posts is 6.38 pm today. Who's up next? Otta has got the ball rolling.

And the prize for making an ot post goes to Otta. Ot because it's a personal attack AND INSULT on me. "I'M SPECIAL" APPARENTLY. AND I SHOULD GO... ON TOPIC... yes flights will increase but there's nothing that says every fu?king one should go over ED UC! Moron of the day = Otta.. You insult and belittle me I have every right to respond in the same way. UC ...

I'd also love to see concord fly again. :)

TheArtfulDogger Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What fascinates me about this thread is > Whilst this is a thread about the noise, there is > also a valid points made by those who can't hear > it and maybe someone with a bit IT skills can ask > people to plot where they live on a map and if > they can hear the planes or not, that way it will > demonstrate where the noise seems to be the worst > or if it is isolated cases in certain areas where > certain people are more sensitive to the noise > than others. Facinating thread *ummm* shouldn?t be for those who can?t hear / don?t have a problem. No one in their right mind would be happy about 4am flights waking them or the dead and constant flights over their homes whilst they are relaxing in their gardens. I don?t get your nimby comment. This forum and this thread would be a great to as you say ?campaign against it? but it is continuously railroaded and disrupted by posts which are OT that divert the conversation towards a we do and we don?t have a problem argument. Utterly pointless IMO. I wonder would these same weird people be out there holding up placards ??? WE DON?T HEAR THE AIRCRAFT NOISE ! ?? at an aircraft noise rally? IE the equivalent to coming on this thread and posting ? WHAT AIRCRAFT NOISE? or similar moronic statements? It is great to hear you say this is a thread about the noise.. as opposed to .. the lack of noise. As for the map idea .. good idea .. In my experience the noise is equally evident and equally loud from Goose Green Peckham Rye and over to the South Circular side of Dulwich Park ie most of ED and much of DV. Everyone has different levels which affect them I may be on high sensitive side but everyone who I?ve questioned locally ie neighbours etc hear the noise and find it irritating heavy sleepers don?t have an issue in the morning but when they are awake out in their gardens they are affected. Thank you. The worry is .. others.. Q. ETA for a moronic opposing ot post. ? A. Within 24hrs >? they just can't help themselves.

KrackersMaracas Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > fazer71 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > I had a thought maybe aircraft noise deniers > and > > holocaust deniers have brains wired in the same > > way or maybe aircraft noise deniers are simply > > deaf? > > > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Seriously? We are comparing people who do not have > a problem with aircraft noise where they live to > those that deny the genocide of between 5 and 6 > million people? What a thoroughly odious comment > from a thoroughly odious individual. Shame on you. Shame on me ? I thought it was an excellent comparison. Holocaust deniers are told about the holocaust but against substantial evidence proof (they can visit the sites) news history books and the rest of society knowing it happened, they simply refuse to believe it ever happened. Aircraft noise deniers are told about the aircraft noise and its impact on others but against substantial evidence proof (they can look up at the sky and hear the noise) read the news and the rest of society knowing the noise is there they simply refuse to believe anyone has a problem. Maybe you should look up the meaning of the word odious the only odious people in this thread are those who have zero sympathy continue to say they have no problem and those who insult with moronic posts. Looking of an odious individual, go look in a mirror UC!

ruffers Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Perception is reality so fazer, I get this is real > for you. Just get that it's not a thing for others > rather than just denying it possibly could be. I never said it was a thing for others!!! It's others who are saying it's not a thing for them so can't be a thing for ME!!!!! DO YOU UNDERSTAND !!!! Peckhampam Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > No way. When Concord went over you couldn't carry > on a conversation. No comparison. There are some flights over today which mean you can't carry on a conversation I was chatting to a neighbour and we couldn't hear ourselves over the noise. The aircraft are flying lower and directly over ED I'd say the dB levels maybe not quite as high as concord but they still cause similar problem only they are now constant where concord was once a day in the late afternoon. I had a fencing company in a couple of weeks ago, flights overhead were constant and the guys doing the fencing commented on the noise (I didn't prompt them!) ...

girlelectric Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Perhaps my idea of noise pollution is a bit skewed > since I grew up pretty close to Heathrow and have > suffered from aircraft noise (inc concorde). I was > merely stating that for zone 2 London, the noise > around these parts is pretty minimal. Thanks for > calling people who don?t share the same opinion as > you morons! We are not sharing an opinion. We are discussing a FACTS. The fact is aircraft fly over ED constantly. Yes compared to living next to Heathrow ED is less noisy. That's a fact too. There was a time when the only aircraft nose we heard was concord ,,, now we have the equivalent to concord every few minutes.. I believe that is also a fact.

TheArtfulDogger Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Oh how condescending fazer71 telling another > poster that "Ultimately if you don't hear anything > this isn't the thread for you." I find it condescending that someone who has zero issue with aircraft noise in an area which is bombarded from 4 am until 12 midnight with almost constant aircraft noise finds the time post they have no problem ! Put it this way. If this was a thread about suffering from Migraines or Athletes Foot. Who in their right mind would put up a post stating ?I don?t suffer from Migraines? or ?I have never suffered from Athletes Foot?? Do you see? > I understand that the idea of a discussion is for > all sides to put their view or comment forward and > not to be dismissed so casually because it doesn't > represent your point. It is not a point it is a fact! Stating you are deaf to aircraft noise when it is blatantly a problem for many people is condescending and idiotic. > You seem to have resorted to insults, swear words > (now deleted I understand) and belittling other > people who don't take your view It is not a view it is a Fact! When it is impossible to get through to the stupid, yes in frustration resorting to insults helps me counter their madness. It helps keep me sane. Lots of research has shown responding to such frustration with a well measured four letter word or two does helps make one feel better. After all I?m only human. > I guess asking you to play nicely with others is > pointless ! However it may get others to listen to > you with a little more respect then you seem to be > attracting now 😏 but that's just my > opinion and curious to see how you respond to me. This isn?t a playground those of us who suffer from aircraft noise are not playing here, are you just playing? We are here to discuss our problem a problem which wakes us at 4am often we wake before the aircraft in anticipation of the coming noise, most of us suffer from a chronic lack of sleep and a form of constant tinnitus which affects us almost constantly from 4am until midnight on most days. (YES we could move away but we don?t want to, why should we when we moved here there was no aircraft noise! The flights into Heathrow were further north over the thames!!) Also we could exchange this problem for another elsewhere.! The solution is discussion to try to find a way to deal with our problem, that is what forums like this are about. Having to deal with those who deny our problem or state they don?t have a problem is disruptive and very frustrating. It diverts the focus of the thread. To be clear this is a thread about Aircraft noise in ED not about those who don't have a problem with aircraft noise. I had a thought maybe aircraft noise deniers and holocaust deniers have brains wired in the same way or maybe aircraft noise deniers are simply deaf? Thankfully I don?t suffer from Migraines or Athletes Foot. Insulting those afflicted always deserves a robust response otherwise idiocy and nonsense takes over! Have you fallen into the trap of diverting the thread and supporting freedom to be an idiot? My response. If you don?t suffer from the aircraft noise have never suffered from aircraft noise engage brain before finger in a thread about aircraft noise. AM I WRONG ? FWIW I apologise to those who do suffer from migraines, athletes foot, parking problems, planning problems noisy neighbours and other issues I do not suffer. Fat chance I will get an apology from those who don't suffer from aircraft noise!

girlelectric Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I swear to god I live in the most rickety old > house with single glazed windows where you can > hear everything going on outside and I have never > ever been woken up by aircraft noise. Is it really > that terrible in ED? I mean for zone 2 London, > it?s a pretty peaceful and green area. Depends where you are in ED and which side your bedroom is on. Also depends on what noise waves affect you. Ultimately if you don't hear anything this isn't the thread for you.

rabbitears No point in dealing with these morons. More pointless than calling Heathrow to complain when the Asian flights come over 1 1/2 hours early. They and Heathrow just don't give a s?it. It's a selfish world where your problems are an excuse for others (morons) to say they don't have any problems.

Fwiw This is a quote from the observer newspaper. The ambience of the British boozer is being ruined by screaming babies and children whose parents allow them to run riot, according to disgruntled licensees and customers. Also m. All pubs are now family pubs. I don't have a problem with kids in pubs if they behave themselves. The problem is the berserker lunatic children who run riot and their idiot parents who can't control their nutty offspring. But then given they are what they are it's little surprise their kids are loopy.

Leftard I most definitely am not.

Nice forest Hill no1 spot. I agree.

There really should be a very big lane for the gravy train.

Zebedee Tring Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Come on fazer, please tell us what you really > think of socialists. Don't hold back! LOL Socialists are fantasists like religious people they believe in fairy tales. The junction another fairy tale told by tfl Southwark many believed them. I said at the start it would be a coc? up a waste of money was I wrong? If it's not broken why fix it.?

Zebedee Tring Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I know that you're talking about Southwark. My > point is that they aren't socialists, at least not > by my definition. And tFL is run by that > celebrated socialist Boris Johnson. OT .. My socialist definition see below .. Tfl may be overseen by Boris but the staff are socialist he's battling their nonsense every day it costs us tax payers huge sums of money inconvenience and waste. Southwark well we know what they are about job creation and self preservation above everything else. 1) Socialism is a highly authoritarian creed based on envy and class warfare. So it seeks to extort as much money as possible from those who have worked hard and been successful and from businesses that have succeeded by looking after their customers. The maximum that they can extort is never enough to support their dogma so they borrow even more, with no plan or intention of ever paying back. 2) Socialism exercises its authoritarianism by the government seeking to control everything in society. The state owns you and everyone else and issues vast number of commands that you must obey. Socialists in government think that they know better than the people themselves do about absolutely everything. They would tell you where, when and with whom to have sex if they could. 3) Socialism wastes money by throwing it at the indolent and feckless who have not succeeded so as to ensure their votes. It thinks it knows more about business than businessmen so wastes unbelievable amounts of money. From the 1946 Groundnut Scheme, through British Leyland and British Steel to Gordon Brown?s ?rescue? of the banks. So in the end they always run out of other people?s money. 4) Extortion, envy, authoritarianism and waste has its consequences: ?It destroys the quality of life of everyone in the country. As when Attlee extended wartime rationing to potatoes and bread and turned off the electricity. As when Gordon Brown trashed the British economy with his fiscal incontinence. As in Cuba where most people live in poverty in what was once a rich country. As in oil rich Venezuela where the shelves in the shops are bare even of basic necessities. ?By punishing success and rewarding failure the results are always inevitable. ?Strivers, who work hard and succeed in life, choose to apply their efforts in countries where they are not punished. When the socialists under Hollande took over and started this punishment in France large numbers of rich and successful people left the country. So their enterprise and hard work now benefits other economies. ?People who have earned money do not want it extorted. Piketty?s study of wealth is massively flawed because he used Sweden as a model. Not realising that rich Swedes park their money offshore where the state cannot extort it. And where it does not benefit the Swedish economy. ?Businesses that the state controls no longer have to look after their customers. So they don?t. We saw this in the 1970s when the ?nationalised? companies delivered utterly execrable goods and services to the British public. They were transformed massively for the better when Margaret Thatcher privatised them. ?Businesses that the state controls no longer have to be efficient and to make profits. So they don?t. They end up needing ever more taxpayer?s money whilst their underperfomance always gets ever worse. ?Immense amounts of our money ends up being wasted in interest payments. Thanks to Gordon Brown we now pay more to service our loans than we spend on defence. ?Whole regions of the country are deliberately kept poor and deprived so that they will vote socialist. Labour constituencies are far poorer than Conservative constituencies. George Osborne is now trying to fix this with his Northern Powerhouse. ?Educated people often tend to be strivers. So education is minimised. By using ?progressive? teaching methods and dumbing down exams and degrees. We end up with great swathes of the population who are unemployable and with great swathes who can only find menial work. In Britain we have been forced to import huge amounts of skilled labour, so great is our educational failing. ?Socialists are so venal and nasty that they will enforce extortionate tax rates on successful people, to punish them, even when they know that this will bring in less government revenue. Labour in the 1970s had a top rate of income tax of 98%.

I'm not talking about Alleyns and JAGS. It's Southwark Council and Tfl.

It's all the fault of the unaccountable socialist elite. They're at home counting their money and laughing at us. It's not a complete disaster (no right turn) but a disaster all the same It wasn't broken now it's slightly broken. Funny as fuc? . Everyone who wasted their time and effort at the meetings to get served up a plate of F U.