intexasatthe moment

There are all kinds of pieces of backland like this scattered around and I am tempted to agree with Aristide on the "what use for that land otherwise " theme . And I like the turntable idea to make vehicular exits easier . Of course consideration of the impact on neighbouring properties is crtical .I used to think that planning guidelines could be relied on to ensure that consideration was fair and proper . But I don't anymore .It's particularly irritating when advice/guidelines/procedures ( which it's taken years of consultation to produce ) are published and then applied in a seemingly random way - PP refused because access too restricted for 3 small properties but deemed ok if the application is for two large propeties.

Quite common for supply teaching assistants to be asked to do unpaid trial days in schools . Though using someone and then telling them they;re too young is out of order .

None of the above prevented Southwark granting PP for both these previously undeveloped backland sites with restricted access http://planbuild.southwark.gov.uk:8190/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=_STHWR_DCAPR_9553701 http://planbuild.southwark.gov.uk/documents/?casereference=11/AP/0006&system=DC

Maybe to do with who was responsible for and bearing cost of consultation/investigation ? S'wark could have made it a pre development condition if PP were ever granted .

sandyman....but....surely the main point was that the slates were blown off ,so presumably the wind was strong enough ? Do insurance policies specify certain wind speeds before a claim can be made ?

-)

I'm interested in details of wind speeds and direction in East Dulwich during the early morning of Jan 18th . I've found this https://www.timeanddate.com/weather/uk/london/historic?month=1&year=2018 which does seem to show a strong blast at 3.50am . Am I correct in intepreting the arrow as showing that the wind was coming from the West and blowing to the East ???

Right ,normal gardening stuff then but late in day . Were the activities noisy Louisa ? Loud chatting ?Dropping metal implements ? Do the outside lights shine into your house ? All of which could be disturbing . I wonder if they'd just come back from a visit to a different time zone and were trying to cope with tha dislocation ? Does seem odd . You're not having us on are you ?

"They do the full works," Louisa can you give details ? Then I'll be in better position to advise .Also I'm very curious/nosey/intrigued .

MickMac - I did look to seeif it was possible to block posters but didn't find this out . Is there a way ? Can you explain ?

"passing lightly" - please don't .Let's have some examples . Full quotes this time please ,not leaving out as you've previously done the important bits like "I'm guilty of this " and " for me it's a knee jerk reaction and makes me feel...." although I appreciate that it might undermine your argument that I'm patronising ,judgemental ,negative etc . I would prefer you to leave me alone and not send me PMs ,you ignored the request which is why I started this thread .As I've said before if there's going to be criticism of me I would prefer it to be conducted openly . It's got nothing to do with being allowed to state opinions unchallenged . Although you may want to work on your method of challenge - think about the opinion and don't leap to the belief that it constitutes an attack or is patronising .

I'm not trying to avoid the debate - I'd I've thought that was obvious - but if there's going to be one I prefer it to be conducted in public and not in private . And as I've said ,my first choice would be if Rendelharris left me alone .But if he's going to continue criticising me ,I will respond .

Joeleg - is that why you think people /I post ? To obtain the moral high ground ? You can't imagine that there might be other reasons - to express their views ,to hear others ,to correct an incorrect quote ?

I can see the difference Rendel .A public exchange means that all the posters can read what we both say .A private exchange means that they can't . I started this thread because I'd asked you not to send me PMs and you ignored me .If you see that as a personal attack ,so be it .If the cap fits and all that .

"I see you've sent a PM . While I agree that we shouldn't continue on the thread - I've made my points - I will not be reading any Pm's from you . You are so judgemental and spoiling for a fight on the public thread ,I am not keen to read what you may voice on a PM . Please leave me alone ." Fair enough Rendel - you didn't like being told that you were judgemental and spoiling for a fight - I can understand that you'd want to respond . I prefer ( though it may well be against EDF protocol ) to conduct such exchanges in public as opposed to PM .Though on reflection ,I'd prefer you to leave me alone .

Entiteled to your view JoeLeg ,but you might want to ask yourself why ,if the "unable to take it " party says don't send me PMs the "disher out" continues ?

And your responses are what ? Attempts to leven the boredom ? End the conversation ? Ever thought of taking your own advice ?

May I refer the honourable gentleman Rendelharris to his post last night at 11.16pm ?

I think Sabrina makes good points . I also think that the whole issue of homelessness is so great that it's painful to think about .To me ,this thread represents a way in which individuals can feel that they are "doing something " ,helping . But I believe that their help is missdirected ,missguided .Greater benefit could be achieved by a regular donation to one of the charities that work with homeless people . Surely that's not hard to understand ? I guess "adopting" our own EDF homeless person creates a temporary glow and feeling that someone has been helped - I'm guilty of this when I hand over money to people in the street .For me it's a knee jerk reaction and makes me feel a bit better about myself and a little less guilty about the money I've just spent on myself in the shops . BUT I think it's a delusion or pseudo helping behaviour as Alice has described it,the money would be better used in the hands of an organisation who work with the homeless . I've reposted my orginal post - for clarity . In your rush to find something to be angry about you seem to have missed the FOR ME in the penultimate paragraph .And the fact that in the last paragraph I'm talking about money - the money I give ,as you've pointed out elsewhere no one has mentioned giving money to the homeless person on this thread . Do the other posters on here actually need you to defend them ? Are you really riding to their defence like a knight in shining armour ?

I've asked you not to - or isn't please leave me alone clear enough for you ? Please stop now .

Rendel - I've asked you to leave me alone ,you clearly don't understand that this means do not send me PMs . What on earth is the matter with you that you feel the need to persue someone with inane criticisms ?

not specific to ED

thanks for the discussion - thanks ? discussion ? In my book a discussion is an exchange of views ,not open season for someone who doesn't agree with those views to heap criticism and decide that you hold all sorts of judgemental thoughts. You've enjoyed it have you Rendel ? You enjoy spending your time attacking people and accusing them of being on their high horse ,judgemental ,negative ,patronising and then trying to justify your accusations ? I'll bear that in mind in future .

"Which I regard as negative, patronizing and unwarrantedly judgemental on people whose hearts are in the right place." that's your view and I think it's pretty clear not my intention . I've said that homelessness is a massive issue which I think people ( and I've included myself in this ) find it hard to think about and can attempt to deal with in a missguided fashion . I think organisations are better placed to help .That's my view - it's you who've decided that this is critical and judgemental of others .I am perfectly capable of holding that view and not disparaging others .Indeed I've explained that I take the same action . Where have I judged people ? "that people's effort and assistance should be going to a homeless charity and not this individual. " but I haven't said that have I ? I've said that I believe resources would be better used if directed towards an organisation . It's a fine point and I can see it doesn't fit your need to argue and be confrontational . And yes ,lets stop going round in circles and let people express their views without being told that they are patronising ,judgemental, negative and on their high horse for doing so .

"You do seem to be saying it's either/or even as you deny it," Rendel - repeating something doesn't make it true . My point is that the efforts made by individuals have not been succesful . "But the resources offered on here - it seems to me - are things like the odd spare blanket or leftover food, giving things like that to an individual is not taking away resources which could be given to an organisation." I disagree . "As noted, I'm sure many of those who've offered help also support charities." they could well be ,I'm not sure why you're labouring this point . I'm not sure why you're so keen on arguing with me ,all I've said is that I think more could be achieved by supporting organisations than by direct help to individuals . It's hardly inflammotory stuff .Why are you so keen to come down on me like a ton of bricks inventing stuff like "why do you assume that trying to help this guy is the only thing those who have done so do? Why does this have to be an either/or?"