first mate

TT Nutrition, So very sorry to hear this. There are many dangerous plants, both to cats and dogs. people should also be aware that the christmas staple- poinsettias are perhaps mildly toxic, but other xmas foilage like holly and mistletoe, even rosemary,are toxic.

Whatever you do, please do not follow the methods of Cesar Milan. Cesar has been bitten many times...that tells you something. Cesar does give some good advice, like 'calm, assertive energy' and, of course boundaries and clear consistent rules are vital for dog ownership, but some of his methods are frankly out of the arc and few professionals would condone them. Get the 'Perfect Puppy' by Gwen Bailey- this is a great basic guide for new puppy owners. As others have said, look at your lifestyle and then research your breed or type carefully. I would not rush into getting a pup. Christmas is not a great time and puppy farmers put extra efforts into plying their trade over the festive season. If you go via the rescue route ensure the dog/pup has been tested with other dogs, cats, people and children. Bear in mind that many dogs behave very differently in rescue as there are very particular pressures. Dun is correct that 4 hrs is max dogs should be left for on a regular basis, pups should not be left at all in first few months of life, they need to be trained to cope with increasing lenghts of separation carefully. Good luck.

James, are you aware that those double yellows are definitely going then? Goodness that almost seems a tacit admission that they were put there to facilitate the builders/developers. What about the M&S build? Enormous trucks are now daily being parked up on Chesterfield for unloading, across the back entrance to the site and blocking the pavement at times. Does it ring alarm bells with you that the developer feels unable to get lorries through the entrance and actually onto the site to unload...? Having now seen the actual foundations for the build it is absolutely clear that the massive delivery juggernauts, as used by Iceland and to be used in future by M&S (unless we have a constant stream of smaller trucks instead), will not be able to turn inside the back entrance. Are you able to confirm if they will be, as was suggested to me, delivering at the front loading bay on Lordship?

James, thanks. Again this morning Upland site chock full of large lorries parked up on double yellows( perhaps the Council's unseemly haste to splash out on double yellows everywhere was to give soaces that developers can use and abuse at their leisure, whike the rest of us suffer. It looks like the same crew park their own vehicles all along one side. No cycling or public transport for them then? How odd that builders and developers can just do as they please...who is this benefitting, I wonder? Where are all the buzzy little parking wardens on their mopeds, usually so keen to screw iver as many drivers as possible, or the dinky little camera car. Odd that.

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi Nigello, > All TfL buses have had CCTV since 2005. > TfL have been very clear that they have agreed > with Arriva that buses used in evening and nights > be the quietest buses they have until 2017 when > all buses replaced. > > Hi first mate, > M&S - as long as the developer builds to the > approved plans little we can do. The approved > plans were agreed with the council transport > expert about swept paths for vehicles. I can't > imagine M&S would want a building shop they can't > deliver produce to. Why would they do that? I > thought I had already posted a reply from council > officials. > > Upland Road. I have had numerous contacts with > council officials and made a formal complaint. > This is not as you suggest me keeping a careful > distance. Short of leading a demo blocking the > road to the builders - which would get moved on by > the Police we're limited in what we can do. What > would you suggest? James you may not be aware that the development at the old Iceland site is now regularly blocking the road in order to deliver building materials. The blocking goes on for some time, and despite having a large building site. I would suggest this is happening because the latest planning configuration does not keave enough room for large vehicles to move in and out of the entrance. Can we expect in future that M&S vehicles will also choose to block the road? I ask again, how are these developers( Chesterfield and Upland Crystal Palace) being allowed to behave this way? Where us the oversight. As our local Councillor can you please get these developers to stop blocking and abusing public highways and footpaths.

Wulfhound, Possibly cycling is not quite so attractive to those in their 50's, 60's and 70's.? On a lovely sunny day perhaps but otherwise age can sometimes get in the way a bit. Tut those pesky older people. BTW what do you make of recent comments that many cyclists are choosing not to use the super highway and continuing instead to ride on the roads and pavement?

Thanks Rob for the latest photo. The company letter is a disgusting example of spin. Truly disturbing to see the breathtaking arrogance that allows them to refer to themselves as a considerate builder ir whatever the exact words are. They clearly think that a little bit of PRese will get them off the hook. They seem untouchable....scary.

James, You seem to be saying there is nothing you can do sbout either development. I find that really hard to believe. It just feels like mild murmurs of disapproval are being made by you, while you actually keep a careful distance. Have you visited the back of the M&S site in the last week? If juggernauts are unable to turn what then? Won't the developer have lied in submitted plans? Surely you can see what havoc this would create and what a massive imposition it would be on the street if you have juggernauts reversing out of the back entrance by the hour? It is bad enough if they come out head first. But reversing would double the time necessary to move the vehicles. The street would be blocked to cars, and the path to pedestrians. Seriously, I cannot believe you are being so laissez faire about this. Assuming you have emailed the Council officers about Upland/CP development, could you kindly post their reply, where they say they are "happy" with the current setup? Thanks for the heads up about the substation.

James, Any comment/answer to the post above about the M&S site- extremely large footprint, where will delivery juggernauts turn?

James, I have another developer question, this time on the old Iceland/ M&S site. The footprint of the build looks to be much bigger than proposed. I honestly cannot see where there will be turning room for the many huge vehicles expected to deliver throughout the day. It looks to me like they will have to go in and then reverse out. Could you please ask abouthis and confirm? If you swing by the site at the back entrance you can clearly see where foundations are being laid.

I have posted onto James thread asking about this. I also wnat to know how Cosmur have been able to build virtually onto the pavement. I understand this was not in the plans.

James a number of us are wondering why one of the developers (MYN) currently blocking up swathes of path and street on Upland/Crystal Palace rd, states in its literature that Southwark Building Control is one of its partners? One would think taxpayer funded Council Building Control should be independent and not so close to private development firms. Is this why the developers, in this case, are able to play fast and loose with public property, laying claim to whole sections of public path and highway for their own use, with not a peep from you, from Charlie Smith or anyone on the Council? Additionally, how is it that Cosmur have been allowed to build right into the path, in a manner that is different from presented plans. What is going on? Could you please comment?

How can Southwark Building Control be a partner with a private developer? Surely building control has to be separate/independent? How can a Council Body, funded( presumably?) by taxpayer money seem to have such a close relationship with private company? Think this is a question for Councillor James Barber and Councillor Charlie Smith.

Some kind of M&S, it is said. Above the retail store the developers plan to build two floors of office spaces and then add another, new level, raising the overall build to four stories and here they plan two penthouses. The developers want to do this, despite in earlier plans being quite clear that there is no call for office space but a great demand for affordable flats. Note they already had permission to build 8 flats on the floors they are now calling office space. But this way, the penthouse, extra floor route,they make the money with less outlay. They then plan to avoid social housing rules by eventually making the offices into flats. Of course this will drag the build out but hey, who cares so long as community minded developers and the retail stores like M&S who work with them to game the planning system, have their pockets full. Oh and they have also recently put in to build a substation there too.

Pretty outrageous this got through planning,past our local Councillors and anyone else meant to have some kind of oversight. I am guessing that the pavement will be moved out more to the road otherwise people literally fall out of their front door onto the path. Was this setup in the orginal plans?

James, Could you post in here the emails where Councillors say they are "happy" for the road to be intermittantly blocked on a regular basis, and large swathes of oath, both sides, to be blocked almost permanently? Are Councillors also "happy" about the real health and safety risks the developers pose to road and path users as well as the impact on residents and shop owners?

James, Thank you for pursuing this. There really is danger of setting a precedent as other building companies are likley to follow the example of Cosmur and see that they get away with using the street as a building site extension, with no fear of consequences. The dangers to all road and path users are clear.

Thanks for that James. I take it that since you did not really answer my questions that you did not make any objections vis a vis the knock on effects on surrounding wards. I am not clear about your answer on hours for CPZ. You seemed to indicate that 12-2pm is not your preferred option on the grounds that enforcement would be cheaper....in theory? So again, what would your preferred CPZ hours be. I think it is useful for us to be clear now because I am pretty sure that is what you will be wanting around here too and given this is your ward I gues you'll put up more of a fight to get it implemented too. BTW all your arguments hang on the premise that CPZ really works well in favour of residents. At the last major debate on this forum many people disagreed. I suspect it is rather like your vision for ED to be changed into a Dutch style cycling utopia- nice in theory but the reality is somewhat different.

Possibly properties around N Dulwich are larger and have off street parking, therefore CPZ does not directly affect householders in same way that it would the smaller properties in ED and therefore residents of larger properties are not inclined to get so involved. The suspicion, despite all you say, is that controls breed yet more controls and that the result is a cash cow, not a real solution. Just for the record, you say in the above that you think "they" chose the wrong option in 12-2 for the parking restrictions; what for you would have been the right option? Did you state your view as to the right option at the time? Did you raise the issue of the knock on effect re parking restrictions for surrounding wards, once controls are in place? In fairness James, you have not stated here what you said about parking restrictions at the CC other thansome comments about yellow lines. Sorry, I do think many of us feel you are pro CPZ by the back door.

It is all part of the cycling agenda/ vision.

Abe, you sound as though you know a little more about what is going on, therefore I would ask James Barber if he will be objecting in any way, shape or form? If not, why not?

Edhistory, I believe, but stand to be corrected, that professional dog wlakers have to be registered with the Council. It is in the interests of the council, as well as dogs and their owners, to support well run dog walking services. On another note, I wonder if the many fitness inctructors we see on the Rye and that are also paid for those services are registered?

Where there is a group of dogs that know each other and are regularly walked together, there is always the risk that they might gang up on any dog that is not perceived as part of their group, this is known as 'packing'. The 'intruder' can be challenged, chased or even attacked. Young males, in their hormonal prime, between the ages of around 6- 18 months, when testosterone is at its highest, can be 'targeted' by older males. It is a way to put the young competitor in his place. It would be my advice if you are walking a single dog to avoid large groups of dogs. The dynamics can be complex and unpredictable. I have seen a group of dogs walked by a dog walker turn on another within the group, it can happen but obviously a good dog walker understands and monitors the pack dynamics and should take action accordingly.