Undisputedtruth

Maybe not. There are more cyclists each year. Cycle hubs fuels demand. Growing demand needs more workshops.

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Walworth Road? (the squares off of the main road) Fine Georgian all over Southwark.

@craigyboy71 If you thought my option 3 was too long for you then I think you would also be disappointed when the ELL becomes live. Not much difference in journey times I'm afraid.

A member of the Georgian Society once told me that Southwark had a fine collection of Georgian properties.

A cycle hub for Peckham Rye station has already been announced back in March http://www.southwark.gov.uk/news/article/705/plans_unveiled_for_cycle_hub_at_peckham_rye_station Benny O'Looney, the architect behind Peckham Vision, is a very keen cyclist and passionate speaker about Peckham town centre. Did another excellent presentation this evening's event. I also remember seeing members from Southwark Living street attending a previous Eileen Conn event at the Bussey building and taking part in the Queens Road Peckham station consultation as well.

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Or overground from HOP to Whitechapel, then H&C > line. Might not be quickest (although it might be) > but quite stress free. I've used Whitechapel a few times and it's a nightmare for changing platforms. Especially with their narrow staircases and walk ways with poor signages.

Honor Oak Park to London bridge or Canada Water. Jubilee line to Baker street. Myriad of choices to Paddington. Though choose Bakerloo line as its platform is adjacent to the Jubilee's. ETA: Canada Water.

East Dulwich to London Bridge station. Jubilee line to Baker street. Myriad of choices to Paddington. Though choose Bakerloo line as its platform is adjacent to the Jubilee's. Much faster than using bus or train and the Bakerloo line exclusively from Elephant and Castle in case you're wondering.

DJKillaQueen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Speed aside, there is now as much skill in women's > footie as the mens. Women's game is much slower and so given much more time to control a ball and to pass. Give someone some time and space, they would look good. Reduce space and time and that same player will struggle. > The other key difference is > that female footballers don't writhe around in > agony every time they are tackled, and make the > men look like wimps in that respect. That's what I thought until I saw the Columbia and North Korea game. Some of the North Korean women were writhing all over the place.

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'm not trying to dis Dulwich, I am from there, > and it will always be home to some extent. You > just can't help yourself trying to pick fights > with me, because you are a moron. No, I gave a rational answer to why people cared so much for the concrete house. Unfortunately you can't do rational thinking because you don't know any better and hence your readiness to pitch it as a Otta v UDT fight. Sorry I refused to take part in your small mindedness so I'll continue to argue using facts.

@benmorg, As I'm fully unaware on what time or exact location where the thread starter starts his journey I'm unable to insert precise waiting times for trains.

Option 1 37 to Brixton (18 minutes) Brixton tube to Vauxhall (4 minutes) Vauxhall to Chiswick (train) (21 minutes) Option 2 Honor Oak Park to Clapham Junction (30 minutes) Clapham Junction to Chiswick (14 minutes) Option 3 South London Line to Battersea Park (12 minutes) Walk to Queenstown station (2 minutes) Queenstown Station to Chiswick (18 minutes)

There's no misunderstanding on my part. You thought you could build a strategic alliance with Jeremy by agreeing to what ever he had said despite his pigeon style to planning in East Dulwich. I'll let EDF decide if they agree on whether your areas are superior to East Dulwich. I know there are lots of council estates around Sydenham Hill. The concrete house is the last surviving example of its type and I applaud those who dedicate their time in saving it and undercovering posible conspiracies.

CharDale Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think a lot of folk in Nunhead use the south > east central forum which has a nunhead section. Not really. Just fewer genuine members of the old Nunhead forum posting on the south east central forum. Many of the old Nunhead posts were deleted and appeared under different guises in the other forum to make the forum look busy. I'd like to see the old Nunhead forum brought back but making clear that Kleinhond is no longer involved in any capacity. I think a lot of the old forum members, including me, would come back.

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Why do you people care so much, move on, live your > lives. It's because people care about their community and pride in their local buildings. If people didn't take an active interest then Dulwich will just end up looking like Croydon or Sydenham Hill.

James, Whilst it's true that Lewisham Council have done more of the running for the Bakerloo extension than Southwark, let's not forget previous work produced in the Kent RUS and TfL's preliminary study. I too am dismayed by Southwark's lack of effort over the Bakerloo extension. The Chelsea-Hackney route is in fact Crossrail 2 and would allow Wimbledon rail users journeys to St Pancras and beyond. Useful knowledge in view of the current consultation on the combined Thameslink, Southern and Great Northern franchise. I do have some concerns about the long term viability and strategic direction of your tram scheme despite being pro tram.

Renata Hamvas Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The problem with delaying this application further > is that the applicants could then lodge an appeal > for non-determination which means it goes to an > planning inspector ie outside Southwark and local > residents control. It would appear that the planning inspectorate usually favours, based on my internet research, M&S developments. Whatever happened to local democracy?

This is for the greedy b'stards. ?Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's needs, but not every man's greed.? ― Mahatma Gandhi

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > could start in 2020 at the earliest > > Oh silly me. Sounds like a dead cert. Unlike this statement "so not going to happen in our lifetimes". Perhaps you don't understand how governance works, silly you, where reports after reports are commissioned before a final announcement is made on a major transport project. Crossrail, as an example, was not the result of a knee jerk reaction. Is it actually being thought of or just a 'what if' dreamt up by transport geeks? The Bakerloo project has gone beyond the thought process for quite some time, Nero. Trams are good but expensive. There are no documents to support the idea that trams are an expensive mode of transport compared to buses. All the evidence suggests trams are more cost effective mode of 21st century transport.

Michael Palaeologus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The idea of an extension to the Bakerloo line is > great, but very expensive and so not going to > happen in our lifetimes. Trams are cheaper to > install and run. OK, they take up road space, but > if that squeezes cars off the road and people onto > public transport, that is good. MP, I sometimes wonder if too much m&s food has affected your judgement! The Bakerloo line extensions offers significant benefits. No one disputes this. Network Rail is supportive of this scheme as it will allow decongestion and greater reliability on trains running through the Lewisham area. TfL have said that the Bakerloo construction work could start in 2020 at the earliest. Funding for the Bakerloo line could be obtained in 2017 when the government decides on the next round of spending. These information are in the public domain. And by the way MP, the Croydon tramlink already goes to Bromley and Merton boroughs, in answer to one of your earliest post.

James, Are you able to suggest possible extensions to the scheme? Considering that the city is close by in the north and the tram could link to Forest Hill, with their London Overground service and possible future DLR service, in the south. What are the risks, in terms of the public purse, to Southwark Council? Will the utility companies be a potential spoiler in the project?

RosieH Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > And have a great botox doc. She's on a pension so won't be able to afford such a doctor.

Cassius Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Somerset Maugham said that after 40 a woman had to > choose between her face or her body. Today I > think we can probably change that to at least 50 > but the concept is sadly the same......... I dunno about this. My mother is in her sixties, doesn't have any wrinkles and not overweight.

anonymous_third_part Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > surely if demand for the victoria services is > there, more trains will be put on this route in > the future? > > i agree that metro frequency with direct trains to > victoria is pretty much essential from Denmark > Hill and Peckham Rye- as this is a major terminus > and area with a lot of offices etc. Rail companies are not particularly good at advertising their routes or have their map integrated with the tube map so that people can make a informed choice. London Overground is popular but not for the reason Bic Bash has given. London Overground invested in train stocks with air conditioning, better marketing, all stations are fully manned, clear signage and frequent train services.

The Croydon tramlink goes to Wimbledon, located in Merton borough of London, since its inception.