mikeb

I tried this out on my bike last night as well. Coming down Calton Avenue, the entrance to the cycle lane after Woodwarde was not intuitive - needed to go a long way to left hand side. And then for some reason the bike lane was on red while the car lane was on green (so I didn't join the cycle lane in the end). In my view, another needlessly over-engineered cycle path.

@ Blah blah: and sometimes you?ll see me and my family on the bus or more often on our bikes. But sometimes a car is the best way around SE London. Moreover, if the CPZ rationale is really about incentivising people to do without a car then let?s be transparent on this, instead of pretending it?s about making parking easier.

Jimlad - do you or have you ever had small children living with you? I never needed or had a car before I had kids. Sometimes you have to compromise. The fact that you don?t have a car make not help you to understand the issues fully.

Jimlad- so you want to be able to park your car outside someone else?s house when you visit them. Do you spot any inconsistency there?

@ Jimlad - I think my post was pretty balanced - it depends on the circumstances but most of East Dulwich will not benefit. Maybe your streets were previously attracting parking for the hospital, the art college or the school. Where do you think the unwanted car parkers came from and where were they displaced to? I have lived on a road where a CPZ was introduced and it remains the only place I have had my car towed away in 25 years of driving.

Of course parking fine revenues are greater than the immediate cost of enforcing the regulations. As I understand it, the requirement is for councils to 'invest' net revenue raised into local transport improvements. But (a) improving transport is already a responsibility of councils and (b) cash is fungible, so diverting parking revenues to this activity means other cash can be freed up. So economically, it is indistinguishable from maximising parking fines to generate revenue for the council. Implementing a CPZ will reduce total parking spaces available (more yellow lines), will not guarantee a space outside your house and will incur additional hassle and cost when dealing with tradesmen / visitors / skips etc. This may be worth it but it really depends on how many non-locals / commuters are parking in your street.

I've always thought they are expressively phallic, gushing forth Christmas spirit upon Lordship Lane. It's like one of those optical illusions: once you see it, you can't stop.

In this enlightening discussion of DFID, let us not forget that its budget is 0.7% of the U.K. economy ie a rounding error. Let?s move on from this trope.

The total payments made by the trust under the PFI will probably be more for 30 years of facilities management (plus any other contracted services) than for the original capital expenditure. You can't compare the two numbers - one is for services over 30 years and the other for a building. Also, PFI contracts often require that the building is maintained to a much higher standard than is usual for public sector buildings - it's pretty common for public authorities under budget pressure to skimp on maintenance and only do what is absolutely necessary. This isn't possible if you've already contracted to pay for it. None of this means the PFI was good "value for money" - it probably wasn't but you need a lot more information to assess this. And even if the PFI contract were good "value for money", it also doesn't mean that the actual specification was appropriate: it may well have been a poor use of limited resources to commission the building and / or to sign up for a long term contract for services.

47 beds across 5 bedrooms must be quite a sight! 8 toilets between 47 people may cause some queues in the morning ...

They should have opened up Gilkes Crescent as well - would have meant a way through Gilkes Place without going through the junction.

@Wulfhound - btw, I cycle every day to work and you're right, it's rarely a problem. But in terms of attracting newcomers to two wheels, it's clearly better to start in May than December.

Right now, driving around Dulwich is a nightmare due to roadworks. Cycling is the only reliable way to get around. And winter is coming...

@ Sally Eva - as we have previously discussed, as a "DO NOT" statement this is not a legal prohibition rule but a piece of advice that may be cited as evidence if there is a specific legal offence actually committed. This guidance does not distinguish between major roads where cars are zipping along at 60mph and urban streets where the speed limit is now 20mph (and in practice difficult to achieve even that). I think it is likely that 5m (or less) will produce sufficient visibility. Are you aware of any accidents in this area where parking was a problem?

Feels like the end of an era. I was in there a few weeks ago and I could see the strain of keeping the show on the road. Thanks for everything Johnny, and good luck for the future. Maybe someone else can give it a new lease of life.

Just to add in extensive works on College Road, top of Syndenham Hill by Crystal Palace and Rossendae Rd.

What are the aims of the Lane Ward Traffic Action Group and what action does it seek?

What an unbelievable waste of time. How few residents does it take to complain / suggest something for Southwark to decide that they need to consult??

It was a weird power cut - some lights and my radio stayed on, but dimmed as if on low power.

Scruffy Mummy - I don't think this is just a "private schools thing", though I acknowledge this compounds the frustration. I know some local private schools take very seriously the impact of cars / parking on locals and call out bad behaviour by parents. I don't know if Jags, DC or DPL cause the same aggravation though potentially there is a little more space around those schools. Part of the problem is I think Alleyns is overreaching its physical resources. I understand that it used to be a more 'local' school so that more kids lived locally but it seems that it is aiming at the pan-London / top academic results market e.g. I think there are coaches coming in from as far away as Hammersmith and Notting Hill.

Clifton - I agree Meadow's charges (especially rent) should be disclosed. Re Champion Hill's "development value", based on the facts at the moment, there is _no_ development value, as by law the land must remain for sporting & social use only. There is a reason for this restriction - the Sainsbury's development was intended to be a "once and only" reduction in open land, and the covenant was the means to enforce this. You could just as easily say "Alleyn's school fields represent a great development opportunity". This is different to a site that that does not have those restrictions and could be developed if only an scheme could be formulated that is acceptable to the planning authorities.

Ruffers - I'm with you. I've asked DHST, Hadley, Southwark but have got nowhere. I'm happy to run some numbers on net matchday income. As a starter, you need to model the following: * attendance and average ticket price paid. I think probably 1500 and ?7 * average beers and food per person. Let's say 1 beer and 1/2 a piece of food at ?3 each and 50% gross margin * number of staff. Let's say 50 for 3 hours each @ ?10/hr Working that through produces ?13,500 per match or about ?9/ spectator. Hadley suggest they've been paying ?7,000 for players (not sure that is a good investment) and I'm sure there are a lot of other costs.

The problem is their investment was predicated on a mistake: that the land could be redeveloped, despite all evidence to the contrary. Their investors? funds are sadly irrecoverable. The best they can hope for us to sell or let the ground for a price that reflects that it can only be used for sports & social purposes. The sooner Meadow is straight with its investors that this is the only viable course, the sooner everyone can get on with their lives, including the management of Meadow.

After 12 years of living around here, I?ve sadly come to the conclusion that Alleyns is just not that bothered about its community relations. The only time we hear from them is when they are lobbying for more development of its metropolitan open land. MacRoban accurately diagnosed this many years ago http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,239732,page=1

Alleyns is responsible for making sure it has enough parking for its visitors. If it does not then it should stop inviting them.