geh

Jeremy Bowen BBC Middle East Editor, this morning Northcross Rd, and no, clearly I haven?t gone away for Easter!

The actress who used to play Mary in Eastenders in W Rose butchers today

Chartwell Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You can't beat Ken's Barbers on East Dulwich Road, > next to The Green. Fantastic hair cut all for > ?10.00 including tip, less than half the price I > was paying in the City. Ok so you can only > understand one word in ten during the time one's > in the chair, but that's half the fun. 'peckham beach?' just don't let him cut your eyebrows I love him!

capt_birdseye Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > As I mentioned above, it's often only more > expensive in the short term. But we are short term animals, that's the problem.

BM raises the cost issue ? exactly, in many cases the green alternative is sold at a premium, therefore some form of government intervention is surely necessary to subsidise such goods/services so they are financially attractive to all. Conversely environmentally damaging good/services are cheap. It goes against the grain to suggest that state should interfere with the free market but I cannot see a wide adoption of green consumerism with out such encouragement, or until it?s too late

gary marks 'gathering' re-issued on kindred spirits, just about hitting my spot

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sorry Geh - I didn't want this to come across like > a personal bash! > > I was just responding to 'denial and avoidance' > views in general, as they are supported broadly by > those who make little effort on behalf of the > environment. > None taken, it may/probably will be the most crucial debate of all! My point is that many may well have the best of intentions but unless positive (i.e. encouraging) methods are employed then they will not be put to good effect. From your earlier post you touch on the point that may be at the heart of it. We all are accustomed to/expect access to cheap, food, clothing, electrical and other goods. This has accelerated rapidly as our economy has moved from production based to services based, and of course leisure time, and our ability to consume has also increased whilst others have become manufacturers. These goods are manufactured at a cost that probably vastly exceeds their monetary value but this is not explicit when they are purchased/consumed. I stand by my assertion that positive fiscal encouragement is necessary to promote take-up. > I can see Henry VIII's point on this one, so > unlike Thomas More I'm going to make sure my > silence does not come across as tacit agreement. > > I'd like to see those who don't act on the > environment to be seen in the same light as drink > drivers and street hooligans. It should be > socially and morally unacceptable. By the time I > start pushing up the daisies it will be, I'm just > trying to do my bit to make sure we're not too > late. > > PS Bob, I didn't mention solar panels and > windmills, because the only scientifically > recognised solution is (as James said) to cut > consumption. As for lightbulbs, I thought this > thread was about local reaction to 'An > Inconvenient Truth'?

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sure Geh, but I'm just struggling to work out why > avoiding destroying the planet is not an incentive > in its own right. > As I said in my earlier post, I?m in the process of making modest lifestyle changes as we will all need to. My point about lightbulbs is toungue in cheek and I will ultimately purchase energy saving ones (when improvements are made on what are currently available) but if the current administration or indeed any to follow is serious about their green credentials then the public needs to be incentivised. I hear what you say about the uliimate consquences being incentive in their own right, and fundamentallty you?re right. But mankind is essentially a selfish and short-term animal. My other problem is thus ? we as a country have reaped the benefit of an industrialised society, however our now post industrial sensibilities mean we are attempting to dictate to other emerging countries how they develop their industry. Kind of do what we say, not as we have done. Eco colonialism?

I have a large warehouse full of current spec filament bulbs. If EDF members wish to contact me when their preferred bulbs are officially withdrawn from the market??.

Sorry guys its the way of the world - not saying its right or indeed I agree with it, but, if you want me to do something that I'm not inclined to do by my own volition then you've got to dangle a carrot in front of me! Dropping say the VAT on more environmentally favourable products may tempt me to go that extra mile (sorry bad choice of words!). It would send out a positive message encouraging individuals to make such changes.

It transpires that mrs geh has withdrawn a considerable amount of money in Cairo recently. Yes she has purchased fuel in ED, but she?s also bought a lot of other things too

Agree with Bob re energy saving bulbs - and you certainly couldn't persuade mrs geh to change yet Waterbut & wormery on order but it?s the transport thing that bugs me, all stick and no carrot? Would seriously consider buying a hybrid car next time, but where is the fiscal incentive? If say the VAT was dropped I feel it could swing it for some.

Cables laid across LL monitoring traffic flow anyone?

Just logged on after a while and this post caught my attention. In principle the idea is sound but there are (as ever) stumbling blocks. Benefit - the true benefit of an 'Estate Management Policy' which is what you are suggesting in a retail sense comes only from contiguous ownership. Put briefly if you own a block of property, or even a street then you are in the best position to control the tenant mix (as far as the current legislation allows). Think about the London Estates - The Crown, Grosvenor, Portman and Howard de Walden and how they have changed their portfolios over the past decade (Marylebone High Street is one of the best eg?s) Second issue is cost! No 6 LL is on the market for circa ?1M. Imho, you let the grd floor for at best rent achievable say ?40K (that?s before you start to think of discounting the rent in order to get a suitable ?non chain? tenant). What have you got then? 2 floors of approx 1,000 sq ft currently used as offices. Change of planning (overcoming local objections!) to residential, convert to 2 X 2 bed flats. What are they worth above a shop? ?250K? (less cost of works) Total value created ?1-1.1M, less; Build costs Transaction costs Finance cost Void costs (ie on unlet space) I can?t borrow money on this scenario, but some can. Undoubtedly someone will take a view on my costs and bid over the asking price. Possibly someone with a track record in the area and existing lines of finance ? you know who I mean! The figures are very rough and ready and open to criticism but you get the picture! The parade that was mentioned in an earlier post by Snorky was in an auction with a guide of ?1.5M. There were some cute things you could do with it, ?work the planning? on the rear yard, refurbish the residential (as is being done), but again it comes down to cost and borrowing. From memory I looked at it (as an exercise) and felt I/one could have bid up to approx ?1.8M. What did it sell for? ?2.5M! Undoubtedly to a cash buyer. I don?t think finance was an option because of the low initial rent roll. You may, as do many, subscribe to the view that hash recession is needed to bring value back to the market. That?s ok if we all keep our jobs/homes etc. Perhaps as a syndicate we could reconvene after such even and buy cheap, but going back to the essence of the post (which I wholeheartedly support) the philanthropic aim to promote LL as a vibrant unique retail offer does not always sit comfortably with the profit motive! Sorry for such a long post but the postie hasn?t delivered my Property Week yet and it?s a slack Friday morning!!!? geh

i have to agree

I'm not sure how the introduction of a CPZ reduces traffic? Surely it merely displaces the problem. What is the real benefit of a CPZ other than revenue to the local authority?

The application made in late Sept '06 is for change of use to A1 Regards geh