mikeb

We are sorely lacking in curry restaurants in this area. Not sure how I will cope with one less. At least there is still somewhere to place a bet.

Post removed on request - Admin

Could be that 76% of vehicles are exceeding the new 20mph limit. But then 100% are exceeding this on Lordship Lane...

Can I take a horse and cart through Loughborough Junction?

I can wink with both eyes and move both eyebrows and both ears, all independently. If only I could monetise this somehow ...

I've got to say that at the moment, morning traffic in Brixton / Camberwell / Oval / Kennington is chaos right now. And I can't believe this 'trial' has been put on the same time as everywhere from Oval to Blackfriars is being excavated. Schools started today and eventually I ended up getting off the bus and walking the middle section from Camberwell to Windmill Road in Kennington. I love cycling and running but for some journeys (particularly involving young kids) it is not practicable and buses / trains to Kennington currently take over an hour. Sometimes driving is the only option (and yes we used to car share). Closing down driving routes doesn't provide additional options but only adds to stress. Yes this is a 'residential' route but people live on every road in London - is Lordship Lane therefore a residential route?

This is not quite East Dulwich but will affect many people who live around here, at least for the next six months and probably much longer. Also relevant for the Melbourne Grove thread. http://www.lambeth.gov.uk/sites/default/files/LJ%20consultation%20visualisations.pdf The proposals are specifically designed to prevent non-residents driving through Loughborough Junction.

This is even more pretentious than the Guardian http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/three-sided-football-285

Looking at Google Maps or Bing Maps, it does indeed seem like picture 6 is the top bedroom with an enormous flat roof (see att). It also highlights the small garden.

So just got a new free view receiver and lo! It doesn't work properly out of the box. Channel 23 (all bbc including CBeebies) isn't working. Everything else is "strength 10" so I don't think it's the arial. Any suggestions gladly received Thanks Mike

Back to Loz's point - of course house price gains should be subject to CGT. To be tax-exempt is a massive incentive to "invest" in property versus other investments. Taking the example, it's hard to feel too sorry for someone who has made net ?200k on their property. As Henry_17 pointed out, the example ignores immobility caused to the individual who hasn't benefited from free money on their current house (maybe because they are younger?) and also cannot buy the ?500k house in NW London. It would be normal for a CGT system to take account of improvement expenditure, and inflation, but windfall gains should be taxed as with any other asset.

@NewDad At the risk of diverting this thread to be about the boundaries of East Dulwich, Peckham Rye Park is firmly within SE22. You might even squeeze in Brenchley Gardens if you were looking to stretch the definition of 'park' ..., and let's not forget SE22's very own golf course Aquarius!

Dog Kennel Hill would pose no problem for a Boris Bike - the gears are so low that going up would be fine and my experience is that the brakes going downhill are also fine (I gave them a decent test one memorable morning coming down Ditchling Beacon) That said, they clearly need to be part of a network i.e. gradual expansion is more likely. And tbh, I think Camberwell / Peckham / New Cross would be the likely limit

I enjoyed this link in the comments to the EDR piece. Bellenden Rd really has changed! http://www.reelstreets.com/index.php/component/films/?task=view&id=1225&film_ref=last_orders

Those very awkward looking houses on Court Lane just sort of appeared without my noticing the planning process or even building preparation - was the design debated extensively in planning committee? (or elsewhere eg EDF?)

Joy of joys - I have the same problem JeanieB had. Anyone know if all the above advice is still true?

Perhaps the arguments should be put directly to the trustees of the charity? e.g. the nominee of the Archbishop of Canterbury?

Otta - I know the song you mean. Don't want to sound a prude but - why? The rest of the songs are witty and lively, and need no subsequent explanation.

Being elected is not a guarantee of being more acceptable than the hereditary principle e.g. Tony Blair would have fancied his chances at becoming President in 2007 ...

This is the key part that explains the 'logic' behind the proposition that "more parking restrictions increases parking opportunity". If true then it would require that the cars that are currently parked on unrestricted roads are generally there all day - wonder if there has been any analysis of this? >>However, with the introduction of a time limit, this would increase the minimum number of parking slots per day from 17 to 100 (10 spaces x 10 hrs of operation).>This is necessary to ensure turn-over of space throughout the day. If those bays operated for just two hours per day you would find that the bays were fully occupied during the uncontrolled hours, which would prevent customers for stopping and parking close by. <<

@BNG - I share your suspicion. This is going to be an extraordinary junction after this refit - all sorts of random cycling measures selected like a child in a sweet shop. Very experimental. There are two changes that I will be suggest to the consultation 1. narrow the pavements, which in the plan would be easily wider than the road. There is plenty of space here for two lanes on TR, a decent width cycle lane and pedestrians. 2. remove the island about 30m down Townley Road. Between the junction and the zebra crossing, I would have thought there are plenty of opportunities to cross Townley Road. So the main effect is to narrow the road for traffic, causing more queues and pressure on the cycle lane. I think most people currently use this to avoid the dog-leg crossing at the junction, where it feels like you need to go backwards to make progress.

SteveO - The recent decision by Westminster Council to refuse permission for some Qataris to knock three (already palatial) houses together would seem to be an example of this. Though not sure the average person in the street will benefit from greater availability of housing from this action ... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2932712/How-town-hall-planning-officer-halted-Qatari-royal-family-s-200million-London-palace-Council-announces-reject-plans-knock-three-Grade-listed-mansions-together.html

James - am I correct in understanding your post above to say that as a "strategic" and "political" manner, this proposal is not subject to normal councillor or administrative oversight? If so then what can stop this undemocratic and half-baked proposal? Thanks Mike

DGT - yesterday was not the best "first game" but hope you enjoyed the atomsphere, the Rabble and bar - come again! This is my first season as a regular too, but it's fairly clear Harry Ottaway has a touch of class - transformed the front row when he came on in the second half yesterday

brilliant, thanks for posting. Does anyone know where the dairy farm was?