Dogkennelhillbilly

Mystic Meg buying Wensleydale in Mons cheesemonger. I did not see her runes.

malumbu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The Castle is the last > unreconstructed pub, and whist not a usual > Guinness drinker it seems right (and reasonable > value) there. > I used to go in the Castle quite a bit but stopped because of the terrible smell from the toilets. Has that been fixed now?

Bic Basher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > didn't spoil views of Dulwich > Park for residents. I'm not a resident on the estate so feel free to discount this as YIYBYism, but surely we can't refuse to build housing just because it partially obstructs a view of the park for some residents...? Doesn't everyone's house spoil someone else's view to some extent?

Well that's next term's Design & Technology syllabus sorted...

redpost Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ab29 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > How about a six storey block on Court Lane > > instead? Or several? > > > Why the fixation on court lane? It's part of the "Southwark is being ruined by a cabal of Court Lane-residing plutocrats and Bolshevik civil servants" conspiracy theory.

Angelina Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I paid ?5 for a glass of coke in the pub in > Dulwich Village - which is enough to make you turn > to alcohol and buy a pint instead Luckily the Crown and Greyhound has procedures in place to discourage alcoholism eg ensuring that no-one gets served within half an hour of approaching the bar

It's all getting a bit personal on here. Let's discuss the issues, not each other.

Where's the cheapest pint [of lager, on draft] on Lordship Lane, then?

heartblock Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Mmmmh that's the point the nursery has a 'no drive > policy' in the same way JAGs and Alleyn's has a > 'no drive policy' - in that neither has Pretty vapid point when JAGS and Alleyns don't have "no drive policies", and neither does the new nursery. Reading the document would clear up your (evident) confusion.

I'll interpret that as a "no", then. Since when do JAGS and Alleyns have a no drive policy? Do you have a link? I looked online but couldn't find one.

It'll be a perfectly silent, emission free column of cars going nowhere... It's not just tailpipe emissions that's our problem: it's congestion, brake and tyre dust, heat Islands and road deaths too.

...[citation needed] Did you read the data in the planning document about how customers accessed the developer's other locations?

OP wants to get a whole bunch of motorists together to bring traffic to a halt and take contol of the streets. Isn't that already happening twice a day and called "rush hour"?

Yes, to be fair, it looks like about 8 years out of the last 22 have had coalitions in Welsh government (with Labour as the dominant partner), with the whole rest as Labour single party government.

Problem with STV is you end up with novelty parties like Australian Motorists Party, Hunters and Shooters Party, Animal Lovers Party getting elected because people "throw away" their second preferences to the fringes, and the preference votes can be traded. Most people only really have one preference when it comes to politics. The effect is probably compounded by mandatory voting in Australia. But no system is perfect.

Not sure the "PR is magic" argument holds much water. We have PR on the UK already: it's led to long term single party government in Wales and Scotland, and a total failure to form government in Norn Iron!

Don't think we can afford to spend much more money on cycle parking because it's nice to have. Don't you know we've got endless wars in the Middle East to pay for?

Aha, that's the one! Thank you. I hadn't understood that there are various planning subcommittes as well as the main committee - but I suppose that makes sense in a borough as big as Southwark! Highlights: planning officer recommends approval. Space for 195 kids. 45 full time jobs and 5 part time. 0700-1900 Monday to Friday. Competition with existing businesses ike next door is not a relevant planning consideration. Site empty for some years, last used as members drinking club, with large former bowling green at the back. (I didn't realise this - good that the kids will have outdoor space). Sufficient space for onstreet parking and servicing. Transport plan implemented in response to first consultation. Heritage acceptable, Grade 2 listed. No comments from Victorian Society or English Heritage. Basement for staff use only (unlike next door which has kids in basement iirc?). 120 letters of objection received inc about transport but also overdevelopment and "harmful noise" of kids playing in the play area. (This last one seems like impossibly mean NIMBYism, and the letter writer should have a word with themselves). Report drily notes that with adequate supervision there should not be significant events of children laughing or shouting, and overall noise impacg is insignificant. 12 letters in support. Transport obviously the big one. Suggested that 11% of kids and 17% of staff would arrive by car, and that surrounding streets have sufficient parking to absorb that additional traffic at pickup and drop-off. Developer to build more cycle storage, have transport plan, and refurbish crossing on EDG.

Sorry, that link isn't working (for me at least), and it looks like the Planning Committee's next meeting is 30 Nov, for which the agenda hasn't been set. 🤔 Am I looking in the wrong place? (Probably) https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListMeetings.aspx?CommitteeId=119

As an occasional cyclist, I don't think more money needs to be spent providing more locking spots for bikes. There are a million lampposts and railings on Lordship Lane and I've never had to look far for a lockable place out the way. Bikes are not regularly getting stolen because the thing to which they are attached failed - it's more often because the locks are chopped off or absent in the first place. TBF it might be different for people who need overnight storage and can't get their bikes in the house, and people who have boxbikes for deliveries and moving kids.

Usually but not always.

It's striking that while castigating the council for being slow in releasing the raw data, OneDulwich is happy to make assertions and speculation that are unsupported by data. For example, in that post there, it suggests traffic inside and outside the LTN may have increased, that the "true" net effect of other schemes has been understated etc. Other "issues" it raises are easily explained e.g. Q: why do the consultation and travel data show different results? A: because the group of people who responded to the consultation (anyone with an Internet connection) aren't the same as group of people making real life journeys through Dulwich. As a private pressure group accountable only to its funders, that is of course OneDulwich's prerogative. It's not a publicly funded body like a council. Has OneDulwich published the origin of its funding or is that still in the dark?

I don't really understand the Express. Who is its target market? Every other paper has a clear demographic. But who buys the Express?

Nigello Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Very, very few people were wearing poppies on and > around LL this morning. I found it rather > disappointing, even more so than the fact fewer > business owners are selling them. (The sorting > office at Peckham was the only place I saw selling > them on Friday.) Did you see the post from the RBL volunteer above about how you could pitch in to fix this? You're obviously quite disappointed.

Is it Community Speedwatch that's being referred to? https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/safety-and-security/road-safety/community-roadwatch >Very interesting, thanks. Found a few schemes > around the country, very clear that people should > be visible and operate during the day, neither of > which is true for these ones. Yes - just like police officers should wear cowbells around their utility belts. It's only way to give burglars fair warning that the cops are around.