Abe_froeman

Some of the comments on that facebook page are very funny!

"The Certified Organic, Biodynamic, Grass-fed Ground Cow" surely?

Goose green ward is a bit silly though. Goose green is esentially a dog run bordered by a dual carriage way. It's not the heart of the ward. I like Mr Barber's suggestions. It also strikes me that they must have done a pretty good job for once if the only complaint is the name of the wards!

Seems a shame to have one ward that is obviously part of Dulwich as a whole that doesn't have Dulwich in the name. Maybe "Goose Green" could be Dulwich Fields or Dulwich East Side or even be named after pub like Half Moon... the "East Dulwich Tavern Ward"?

James is this survey the ?10,000 feasibility study?

I wonder if flights landed at a shallower angle this week due to the high winds. There was some mention (possibly on this thread) of here having been a trial of landings being steeper so that the planes were higher for longer and therefore more quiet.

Charlie don't be too hasty... Tha plan sounds positive for East Dulwich residents, we're not on the list!

These people? http://www.conwayaecom.com

I can't see that happening ED oldie - they've just spent billions linking Heathrow to central London via cross rail!

The report on Dulwich Village will be a week old tomorrow. How can that be considered 'news'?!

What beautiful offices!

Would also make a useful secure buggy park for people living in flats or not wanting to keep their buggy in the hallway.

You'd either have to demolish the buildouts or put them in front of someone's house in many streets. As you say, the buildouts purport to improve visibility at junctions.

"What do you propose James to halt the ED developer wrecking ball?" I imagine very little, given that Southwark are also benefitting from selling land and buildings to property developers. Though the details of how many such properties and to which developers and for what share of the profit of the post development value are elusive. There are a number of FOI requests about these online but the information seems to be unavailable.

They could buy a key and photograph it from inside hangar! The picture at the top of the page reminds me of these: http://www.123rf.com/photo_26621451_three-pigs-in-field.html?fromid=VFc1aFd2V3pISkQxQlNRME50amJoQT09

James was this an election pledge, or general lib dem local government policy?

10 boxes, 8 offices and a couple of penthouses on the top?

Dear James I see the luxury devlopments at 236 and 240 lordship lane are progressing very well. Are you able to help me find out how much profit Southwark will make on behalf of its residents as a result of selling these plots? I can't find the information on the Southwark website nor details of the sale on the land registry website. Many thanks, and happy Christmas!

Would that mean they have the power to reduce the number of trains per hour on those routes?

Good evening James I wondered if there had been any developments regarding the proposed Melbourne Grove traffic barrier at the DCC meeting on 2 December? I can't see anything on Southwarks website unfortunately. I also wondered if you knew how much Southwark had sold the plots at 236 and 240 Lordship Lane for? This information does not seem to be available at the Land Registry website for some reason. Many thanks

Interesting article about actual capacity at Londons airports here http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/dec/11/third-runway-heathrow

Wulfhound, looking at it there are actually islands in the middle of the road at all 3 branches of the junction: The south circular is already very wide at that junction, widening from one to two lanes east bound, and is nearly as wide on the westbound side. Looks to me like there would be plenty of scope there for building a larger island for pedestrians without grabbing privately owned land. And to use the land in front of the grove would mean relocating some or all those street lamps and/or the mobile phone mast / telpehone exchanges that are there.

2 out of 2 on time would be more surprising.

Surely there must be an alternative crossing design that doesn't involve appropriating someone else's land? Traffic planners do often achieve this elsewhere.

Lowlander's link from September confirms that Monkey, and it also shows that only one train this week leaving London Bridge after 5pm has arrived in E Dulwich on time! Is today's 18.10 also cancelled?