first mate

Yes, but the issue of traffic build up is relevant. If, as seems, this is a big business I hardly think users will be entirely local and arriving only on foot and bicycle. Trains are being cut and buses held up by traffic build up on main roads partly through LTNs. With a large school and medical centre only yards away, I understand resident concerns. Plus, if there is such a huge demand for nursery schools in the area why do the smaller nurseries feel threatened?

I do wholeheartedly agree with this. SUVs seem to be expressions of vanity and status; OTT for city living.

HP, I think it is to do with sound. The idea is that the trees, on a few sides, act as a sound barrier.

😀 Penguin68 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Strangely, a lot of them seem to have animal based > names! > > Not always an accurate pointer...

A menagerie of trolls. Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Unfortunately there seems to have been a plethora > of people registering for the forum in the last > couple of weeks who seem to be here just to > antagonise and be unpleasant. Strangely, a lot of > them seem to have animal based names!

I didn't read the complaint as 'moaning about' and being 'against other people enjoying themselves', it is about the negative impact noise has had on the other poster...and has been clearly qualified as keeping young children awake and interfering with the other poster's ability to work. These are reasonable concerns. Sorry if you really cannot see that. Anyway, it has been reported by a number of people and perhaps something can be sorted for next year. Perhaps the festival or council could fund noise cancelling headphones for those who request them. Earplugs alone are not that effective. Roachy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > And that is the selfish response that typifies > the > > average festival goer it seems. Not against the > > event for the last time, but think the location > is > > too close to people's houses, which it > definitely > > Selfish? Says the person who?s moaning that 10,000 > people are out enjoying their lives? when it?s you > who can?t handle any slight inconvenience. > > You typify the word miserable. If loud music for > 30 hours that finished at 10:30 every night has > triggered you so much I genuinely feel sorry for > you

What happened to consideration goes both ways? johnhcollins Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > yeknomyeknom Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Men peeing in all the bushes on the outskirts > of > > the park, constantly, even though there are > > plentiful toilets nearby with no visible > queues, > > is worse than the noise. Disgusting, flagrant > > selfishness. We?ve complained to Gala but not > a > > lot they can do other than provide plentiful > > toilets. > > you really need a hobby or something to occupy > your time

Rockets, James McAsh came on here and explained that re CPZ each road would 'decide' if it was to have CPZ or not. Of course, they had to do it that way or they would never have got the CPZ ball properly rolling, when they introduced CPZ round the station. Had they done it as a whole area thing, they'd never have managed the CPZ onslaught. Southwark saw no contradiction in actively encouraging car ownership for those living closest to the train station. Of course, however, when it suited them Southwark reneged on their own terms and decided to chop Melbourne Grove up and count it as two separate roads. Had they counted it as one road they could not have put in CPZ as the majority of residents were against CPZ. The Councillors also made a big deal about how vital it was to listen to minority voices, not just the majority view. So now I guess their plan is to invite people and children from all over the borough to have their say?

It is crazy. Artemis Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > geh Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > trains to London Bridge halved > > trains to Crystal Palace, stopped entirely > > what is going on, I have seen nothing from > either > > councillors or MP on these cuts. > > guess we are just supposed to suck it up > > Agreed. How are any attempts to encourage people > to move away from driving going to work if the > councils/government/TFL do not work together? > Reducing public transport options at the same time > as shutting roads is extraordinary. Is NO > consideration being taken for those who aren?t > able to cycle or walk to where they need to go?

Ah well, that's ok then.

I think I see what is happening here, it is to keep attacking people on a personal level but accuse them of doing the same in the hope others believe this is what is actually happening. Tiresome. Anyway, agree with Alice's point.

Hilarious response. It doesn't actually bother me...at all. I like loud music. However, I am able to step outside the limits of my own experience and empathise with the plight of those who feel differently from me. I can understand that for residents close by who do not share my tolerance for very loud music and who have other priorities and responsibilities beyond 'having fun' enduring this event for three days solid could be quite testing. johnhcollins Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > nah fully you need to learn to have more fun and > let things bother you less. this isn?t as much of > an inconvenience as you think it is

Well, many well informed posters, with a seemingly good handle on the data, beg to differ.

Thinking laterally, would it not be possible for the live event to be amplified through headphones the festival goer wears, that way saving resident's ears?

How do you know it is just the elderly? How can you relax if sound levels are beyond your tolerance, when you are trying to work or get the kids to sleep? Perhaps the festival either needs to turn the volume down or find a venue that is not so close to residential areas.

He repeatedly said he isn't. I am interested to know which ward he lives in.

Hedgehog which ward are you in?

Manatee says, "don't know which one Charlie Smith is" That's a bit odd. He is a very well known Labour Councillor. Perhaps you do not live locally at all?

What is bu*****t? Saying it is too loud when you live next door to it? Saying it is keeping your kids awake? Blah Blah has a totally valid perspective. Not everyone loves really loud music and earplugs do not necessarily work, not once music reaches certain volumes. Agree, Alfa Mist is wonderful when I choose to listen but not if I am trying to work or wanting to sleep. If the music can be heard all the way in Honor Oak, it is clearly very, very loud.

Why does festival music have to be played at deafening volumes? I'd have thought it's more for the festival goers to move to a location where they won't bother anyone rather than expecting everyone else to bear it without protest, just because it's London, man. I'm all for festivals but agree for those living next door to it, who have no choice in the matter, especially with young children, it must be hellish.

And yet Rah, you still drive a car? rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Closing a handful of side streets to through > traffic has led to people losing their sht. They > claim that they want to spread pollution to every > street as a way of ensuring 'clean air for all' > (rather than the reality of that move - clean air > for no one). > > Ask people what they want and they'll say 'fewer > cars, less pollution, more active travel'. On the > climate, they'll say 'reduce emissions, improve > energy efficiency'. But implement anything that > causes inconveniences, or requires a change in > behaviour ("perhaps stop driving an SUV around the > local area, flying abroad for your holidays and > cut out meat, for example)... Well we've seen what > happens - "Put it all back how it was"! > > I have been left feeling it's totally pointless. > Perhaps our only way out is to invest more > research into geoengineering and technological > solutions.

In fact, now fottos has reminded us of the central position China has as the world's prime polluter, is it not fairly important to find out to what extent Southwark and its pet contractors use China to source materials? first mate Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Wasn't Southwark Council buying a lot of its > paving from China? > > fottos Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Sure, we can all do our bit to reduce carbon > > emissions. So let's start by reducing imports > of > > Chinese made goods. China is by far the biggest > > producer of CO2 and they are doing nothing > about > > reducing CO2 levels. They build one massive > new > > coal powered power station every 10 days. > China's > > strategy has resulted in destruction of swathes > of > > production capacity here in the UK - partially > due > > to their use of cheap polluting power > generation. > > The UK cannot compete because of the high cost > of > > electricity here and other restrictions related > to > > CO2 reduction. > > > > The world's biggest CO2 producers... > > China (28%) > > Rest of the World (21%) > > United States (15%) > > India (7%) > > Russia (5%) > > Japan (3%) > > Germany (2%) > > Iran (2%) > > South Korea (2%) > > Saudi Arabia (2%) > > Indonesia (2%) > > Canada (2%) > > Mexico (1%) > > South Africa (1%) > > Brazil (1%) > > Turkey (1%) > > Australia (1%) > > United Kingdom (1%) > > Poland (1%) > > Italy (1%) > > France (1%) > > > > Here in the UK we our meagre 1% output and > being > > made to meet all manner targets by means of > many > > ill-thought out plans - such as heat pumps > which > > grossly inefficient and impractical in a city > > environment.

Wasn't Southwark Council buying a lot of its paving from China? fottos Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sure, we can all do our bit to reduce carbon > emissions. So let's start by reducing imports of > Chinese made goods. China is by far the biggest > producer of CO2 and they are doing nothing about > reducing CO2 levels. They build one massive new > coal powered power station every 10 days. China's > strategy has resulted in destruction of swathes of > production capacity here in the UK - partially due > to their use of cheap polluting power generation. > The UK cannot compete because of the high cost of > electricity here and other restrictions related to > CO2 reduction. > > The world's biggest CO2 producers... > China (28%) > Rest of the World (21%) > United States (15%) > India (7%) > Russia (5%) > Japan (3%) > Germany (2%) > Iran (2%) > South Korea (2%) > Saudi Arabia (2%) > Indonesia (2%) > Canada (2%) > Mexico (1%) > South Africa (1%) > Brazil (1%) > Turkey (1%) > Australia (1%) > United Kingdom (1%) > Poland (1%) > Italy (1%) > France (1%) > > Here in the UK we our meagre 1% output and being > made to meet all manner targets by means of many > ill-thought out plans - such as heat pumps which > grossly inefficient and impractical in a city > environment.

I think that is the point some of us were making, let's not narrow the focus exclusively to car usage. rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Nigello Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Maybe the person who criss-crossed the globe on > > aeroplanes has no or only one child, is > vegetarian > > or vegan, doesn't have a car, cycles most > places, > > gives to charity and meticulously recycles or > > reuses stuff? It isn't a good idea to demonise > one > > single thing when, in fact, air travel isn't > > anywhere near as big as a bad-boy as others > are, > > and is making headway in lighter aircraft, > greener > > fuels, more efficient use of aircrat, etc. > > Agreed. It probably is wise for us to pursue > policies that generally reduce air travel, cut car > usage etc though.