spider69

Should have said, how big does the person or child have to be before you stop being a super hero? pity you cannot direct this Charles Bronson approach to some of our cycling brethren

How big would they have to be before you pissed your pants?

Look on the bright side, all 20 mph fines could be given to L/H to cover bodged repairs. As if.

Thanks for this info.where exactly are the cameras? As you turn right going up Sydenham Hill from Lordship Lane and then along the road from the roundabout up to Crystal Palace. You are correct kerching Will buses be flashed and fined?

Where did this happen.

Salsaboy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > And tailgating buses. Happened to me this > afternoon. And what speed were you driving and where.

As they drive all day I would think they have a better idea of safe speeds than a Council Officer sitting in their office ticking P.C boxes. No body yet has explained how this madness was included in the manifesto under healthy living.

As a matter of interest I drove at 20mph along the route above on empty roads and yes I did feel like cutting my wrists at the end. Can easily see how this will become a cash cow. A very badly thought out scheme from start to finish.

DadOf4 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > using Google translate from Barberspeak to > English: > > "What we agree last night was to fund a study of > the anticipated impacts of closing the road. Once > we have that study we will decide how to proceed. > Clearly something needs to be done which could > range for closing a road to better traffic > calming. But until the study is completed - I > suspect they have all the data already for this > study - we don't know whether a road closure will > be thought practicable. > Lots of research to suggest some traffic > evaporation would occur with a road closure - > likely most would use Lordship Lane as an > alternative. Some Townley." > > Becomes > "I think this is a great idea and it fits > perfectly with my political agenda. However, I > will pretend to be balanced in my opinions so as > not to upset any objectors who could vote for me. > I will gently lobby in favour, but always > maintaining that I am yet undecided. I will > present lots of facts that support the case "for" > and give anecdotal examples of others who are in > favour based on "doorstep conversations" I've had. > But, still I will say that I will only decide once > this has been properly debated & consulted on. I > will then vote in favour of the scheme, > irrespective of any strong local feelings" > > off he goes again Spoken like Sir Humprey Appleby. You could have also included It's clear that the Committee has agreed that the suggestion is really an excellent plan. But in view of some of the doubts being expressed, may I propose that I recall that after careful consideration, the considered view of the Committee was that, while they considered that the proposal met with broad approval in principle, that some of the principles were sufficiently fundamental in principle, and some of the considerations so complex and finely balanced in practice that in principle it was proposed that the sensible and prudent practice would be to submit the proposal for more detailed consideration, laying stress on the essential continuity of the new proposal with existing principles, the principle of the principal arguments which the proposal proposes and propounds for their approval. In principle.

For what area and project is the ?5/10.000.00 going to be used for. Would have thought there was a greater need for funds for more worthwhile project/s. Still its who you know.

Posted by fazer71 June 19, 01:15PM Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > As if Social Housing would EVER be allowed in the > Village. > I believe most of Decker Rd remains as social type housing right in he heart of the village. Out of interest looked on Google at this very nice street, Just how many are still social housing and not been sold off under Right to Buy? Not an area one equates to Social Housing in ones mind

New residents in ED have their head up their arse that they have no idea of the real world. All they are worried about is how I can protect my over paid house,s value. Lets wish for a new financial crash and see how things change.

I have used Iceland in Peckham and found the staff no where near as good and the store leaves a bad taste in the mouth. Once the store in LL closes I wont be going out of my way to visit Peckham. Great shame as the LL Iceland was an oasis in what ED was once all about. Still I have been in my house since 1966. Rock ON

Out of interest how many people have responded to you? More importantly how many people asked you for the above? If it had not been posted on this forum would we have been told before it all went ahead.

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It's the suggestion that Iceland is only there for > 'poor' people is the very reason it has been > stigmatized by some who have suggested it is an > eyesore. > > I do not use Iceland primarily to save money. I > use Iceland when it is convenient, often just > popping in > when out and about on Lordship Lane. The staff > there are indeed friendly and helpful with a more > personal touch. > > I cannot see any replacement being able to give > that personal touch and I will be sad to see it > go. > > DulwichFox Perhaps this comment sums things up Re: Revised new - M&S planning application to replace Iceland.. Posted by richard tudor 13 December, 2012 09:32 Perhaps ED people believe they are in the film Independence Day. Went to bed one night living in their perfect fashioned world and next morning, it all changed.HELP Iceland is always mentioned but it was there long before many people moved in when not being able to afford elsewhere. Whilst it is welcome for the area to improve do not ignore the requirements of others. Rather like the old days of moving to a country village because it was cute and then doing all in ones power to make it over to to where they came from. People make an area not prissy shops.

Why would Council Officers ask for this just like that? Is this do do with proposed revamp of pavements around Lord P Pub at great expense for no reason Perhaps Cllr Barber could throw some more light on this and who has requested Cllr Officers to raise this

I am sure you know. Road tax or what ever it is called. Cannot be bothered to look it up.

bobbsy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Please don't force more rat running onto Underhill > Road. Even with traffic calming measures most cars > exceed the limit. > > Potential idea - close Underhill halfway along so > its no longer a "through" road, and residents can > access from the appropriate end? Why? If people have paid their car licence they are entitled to use the road. There too much let's close this and that. The road has always been a thru road long before the recent influx of people.

Is the last paragraph a wind up. Give me strength

How long before people admit it should have been as it was? Change for the sake of change and lust for free money handouts

When Cllr Barber came off his bike was that an accident or what?

How long? Both for TFL and Southwark roads. If you took the accidents on Townley road it would prove nothing. Do not think a short period of time will prove anything. You have to take things over a much longer period. Still Southwark will jump on a figure and convert it into positive spin for a flawed policy.

Most Leaseholders consider Southwark Service Charges and Major Works obscene. So it could have been

I was under the impression that the buildings fronting the station were to be pulled down, opening up the whole area into a useable and people friendly square. The concrete mass should be pulled down. Dark and very depressing. In fact the whole block area should have been pulled down.

why cant the Dulwich Park ones be open. Closed since they started the drainage works which finished sometime ago?