BrandNewGuy

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Some people on here are very quick > to think that Hamas are squeaky clean By 'some people' you mean 'no-one', I think.

vgrant Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > you know you are playing with fire when you dare > to quote Noam on here ( Noam chomsky, otherwise > know as the bleeding heart liberal LIAR chomsky, > gencide denier and fascist dictator apologist blah > blah blah ) He is not a genocide denier - with regard to the Holocaust, he expressed his profound disagreement with various European laws (in France and Germany) that make it a criminal offence to 'deny' the Holocaust. That's a very different thing.

LondonMix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Teachers and other staff may very > well commute by public transport. Everyone I know > uses public transport to get to work (including > those with cars who primarily use them on the > weekend). There are plenty of people who use their cars to commute within London, including teachers.

worldwiser Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I very much doubt the new school will generate > much parking. With the demand for places likely to > be insane it'll come down to residency within > shortest distances from the school gates. I expect > the average commute will be somewhere between a > quarter and a third of a mile. Parents would be > out of their minds to drive a distance which would > take longer than walking. I for one will be > choosing to walk. Assuming of course we get a > place. Don't forget teachers and other staff. They are unlikely to live very locally, so are far more likely to use cars.

I'm not in favour of 'preserving everything as it is'. I just need to see the full impact of these proposals before making my mind up. Here are a few starters: 1. Fitting DHFC into the existing artificial pitch area is laughable ? the 'plan' allowed for full facilities (changing rooms, bar, function room, board room etc) taking up a space of about 18 feet x 40 feet on the west side of the pitch. No details about proper access. 2. What is the 'development' proposed? Houses (as with Abbotswood Rd etc), flats, a huge block? We've no idea. 3. Linking to DKH wood is a good idea, but a full wildlife/green assessment of 'Greendale playing fields' (The Metropolitan Open Land) needs to be done. At the moment, the thin strip of land by the railway tracks (which consists almost entirely of wildlife-unfriendly sycamores) is currently listed by Southwark Council as of greater natural value than Greendale playing fields ? which currently is listed as having no wildlife value. I'd urge anyone interested to get involved in the 'Friends of Greendale' group. A diversity of views is welcomed.

It's not an obsession, it's concern for the future of a valuable slice of open space. Greendales [sic] is not entirely inaccessible, but I don't see why open space should only be valuable if everyone can tramp all over it, having had it tidied up and 'de-natured'. There is a wildlife issue too to be considered. The access and ?loop road' you mention - can you point us towards some sort of map or plan that shows this? And a forum is just that - a place to discuss issues. If people then reach their own conclusions and then contact the developers, that?s fine, surely. I?d just add that I have no material interest in the development or otherwise of the site ? I occasionally watch DHFC, I use the footpath to walk to Sainsburys and I occasionally birdwatch in the area. It would be good if other contributors state if they have an interest, direct or indirect, in these proposals, too.

Just posted on the blog: A lively meeting at The Fox on The Hill last night voted to form a new Friends Of group for Greendale. Work is underway to set up a constitution and to draft objectives. All present were firm in support for keeping Greendale green and for @DHFC?s future. Updates to follow over the coming weeks. Please do get in touch if you would like to be a member - [email protected]. http://keepinggreendalegreen.tumblr.com/post/92614401974/friends-group-to-form

They said that the footpath from Greendale would be improved for proper bike and pedestrian access, but no detail.

Completely unclear - their two useless pictures show no direct access at all. I assume the road would skirt around between the extended park and the new 'development', whatever that's going to be.

I'm with Jeremy - the London Bridge branch is terrific and the bottled craft beers are far cheaper than on Lordship Lane. And they're no longer the goliath they once were - they operate 37 branches across the country.

We went along to the Hadleys information day at DHFC on Saturday and marvelled at how slippery they are at actually describing what development they intend to carry out. There is a meeting at 8pm tonight in the Fox On The Hill to set up a possible 'Friends of Greendale' group to lobby for the best solution for the whole site. It's short notice, but at this point it's more important to move quickly and then keep others informed about how they can contribute. The 'Keep Greendale Green' blog has some photos of the proposals ? none were available printed or as pdfs, tellingly - and further details here: http://keepinggreendalegreen.tumblr.com/post/92458493134/hadleys-proposals-on-view "On Satruday Hadleys, the developers who have bought the freehold which DHFC sits on, exhibited their proposals. In summary these are: To build on the existing DHFC site & To relocate the DHFC football pitch to the artificial pitch on Greendale The architects (Farrells) drawings show two options (see photographs below): To extend St Francis Park into the car park/car wash area and to use the whole of the existing club footprint for building. To connect Greendale Fields with St Francis Park by converting the existing roadway to the south of the pitch to a green corridor. There were no plans for specific types of building development on show and the plans for Greendale were concentrated on building a perimeter for the new pitch. It seems that this will be the key area for consideration, in terms of its MOL status, allowable use and encroachment on the green space. Do come to the meeting about a possible Friends group tomorrow evening, Tuesday 22nd July at The Fox On The Hill pub at 8pm onwards. Apparently Southwark council have expressed opposition to the current plans and are planning their own consultation on the future of Greendale later in the year. So now is a great time for local people to come up with ideas about how best to use the space in the future."

Titchmarsh's chummy grin. Stop looking so smug, garden boy!

malcolmchurch Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Amazed and delighted that people are paying so > much attention to my posts. Good for you. > Dear BrandNewGuy > > "If malcolmchurch doesn't apologise here for > spreading unfounded rumours about the Capitol, > I'll find it as "insulting" as he did my > suggestion that his cinema saga was all rumour and > hearsay. Actually, I won't - my skin's thicker > than that." > > My post was not unfounded and was based on facts > regarding what the Wetherspoons staff had been > told by their manager and so I was insulted that > you accused me of spreading false rumours. So I > have nothing to apologise for. I don't really want an apology, but if you'd said originally that your claim was based on what you'd heard, that would have been fine. But your original post was: ?I thought you might be interested to know that The Capitol pub (Wetherspoons) in Forest Hill will close as a pub in the next 3-6 weeks and re-open as a cinema.? Which became: ?The staff believe that it will become a cinema but that is not so certain as there are several things to be done.? And eventually: ?Capitol (Wetherspoons) staff 90% sure it will happen? "... based on facts regarding what the Wetherspoons staff had been told" is hearsay and it would have been nice to say so in your original post.

If malcolmchurch doesn't apologise here for spreading unfounded rumours about the Capitol, I'll find it as "insulting" as he did my suggestion that his cinema saga was all rumour and hearsay. Actually, I won't - my skin's thicker than that.

Labour shows no sign of making the 'breakthrough', so with more voter-friendly women in the Cabinet for a year (without having to push through controversial legislation), plus the referedum promise (to neutralise UKIP, moost of whose Euro voters won't vote for them at the general election) and the economy not tanking between now and then - then the Tories have a good chance of the being the largest party again. What's going to be fascinating in the case of a hung parliament (still favourite with the bookies) is the post-election horse-trading. The Lib Dems (and even UKIP) wll have learned a lot from the experience of the coalition and will not be pushovers. What odds a minority government struggling through, making ad hoc deals?

The yah-boo playground stuff from the teachers' unions and their friends in the media is tiresome - they've had a go at every Education Secrtary in living memory, though they felt some affection towards ex-teacher Estelle Morris, who was perhaps the least competent Cabinet Minister of the Blair years. This constant shrill criticism comes across as a kneejerk childish hatred of the big boss rather than geuine criticism meant to help come to grips with the significant challenges of our mediocre education system. As one of my favourite blogs put it last year: "Mary Bousted, the general secretary of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers, will tell the ATL conference in Liverpool that the Conservative reforms are "undermining and harming our pupils' education," the Guardian tells us. But that isn't news. It is what the teachers' unions have always said, whoever is in power. It be news if she had said anything different. Which suggests there are two thumping contradictions in the unions' thinking. The first is that they hold these two beliefs: All schools should be run by the democratically elected government. It is an outrage if that democratically elected government seeks to make changes in the way school are run. The second is that they hold these two beliefs: Every change made in education for as long as anyone can remember has been disastrous (that is why we campaigned against them). Standards in our schools are higher than they have ever been. Discuss. Do not attempt to write on both sides of the paper at once." http://liberalengland.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/the-contradictions-in-teaching-unions.html FWIW I thought Gove was politicially inept and more usually wrong than right.

Fuller's are pretty good at doing the quality hotel/pub thing. Given the lack of B&B/hotel accommodation in SE22, SE21, that model could work.

With contactless they can.

I see the redevelopment of the garden centre site has started. Or at least the demolition part...

James, I trust you've seen this thread about Conway moving cars from East Dulwich Grove: http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,1354789 They also put up a sign outside our house when replacing a drain cover and also had the wrong date on that. Luckily, we were away and weren't affected. It seems to me that there's something rotten at the heart of Southwark Council's relationship with Conway - and it's the resdients who suffer. Is there any way examples of their incompetence and worse can be collated to make a serious challenge to their status as Sothwark's 'favourite' contractor? I live in hope more than expectation...

the-e-dealer Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So an 11 year old boy stuck at a bus stop miles > from home is passengers misfortune. Great get a > job in a caring profession bng. Driver's discretion, as it was before if the child didn't have sufficient cash. Apologies for being an uncaring hard-hearted b*stard.

If you're worried about the 'surveillance state' don't register your Oyster card. To most of the horror stories played out here, the answer is, 'Don't forget your bus pass / Oyster card'. It seems to me that TfL have addressed the safety concerns well - any other circumstance is simply the passenger's misfortune.

Yes, but currently not capped.

As has been mentioned on a separate thread, cash payments make up just 1% of fare payments (and the majority of those are by 18- to 34-year-olds, regarded as not relatively vulnerable) and that figure is the same for central London, where a greater proportion of tourists travel. There's a thoughtful blog about the changes here: http://www.londonreconnections.com/2013/ending-cash-fares-buses-daniels-dream-electric-beeps/ And here's the breakdown of bus payment types:

I think my initial sympathy with the OP was that people were in the front garden/alley/drive. Regardless of the rights or wrongs of bin rummaging (I?m indifferent), I?d be unhappy with people being in my front garden or right outside the door or down the side alley who weren?t there to visit, ring the bell, deliver something etc. I think I?d feel entitled to ask them to ?get off my laaand?.