ed_pete

sand12 Wrote: > ....Complete demolition of the site > is a final erasure of the site's legacy as a > social resource for the most vulnerable: the poor, > sick, war veterans, maternal health, and the early > NHS. > As was made clear in earlier posts it is not being completely demolished. The central "chateaux" will be incorporated within the school buildings. See link to PDF's. GIYF https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/3059/public_consultation_a1_.compressed.pdf https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/3063/Public_Consultation_Boards_low_res_Part3.pdf

Whilst I accept that preserving our heritage is important, in London where land and property prices are very high compared to other parts of the country and there is a demand for services which I feel should be housed in modern, fit for purpose premises, we need to be less sentimental about old buildings. A building designed for the needs of healthcare in the 19th century is not going to be state-of-art for 21st century. It?s running costs, maintenance requirements and carbon footprint are all going to be higher than the modern equivalent. IMO, the retention of the central ?chateaux? is a pure concession to assuage local outrage but it was opined by James Barber that retaining it was a ?a key aspect to get planning permission?. Perhaps these are one and the same. Anyways it?s use as part of the school is unclear. We should take pictures, videos and maybe even use VR technology to create an archive of the building, inside and out so that future generations can see what was there, even if they are unable to experience it for real. Then we should get rid of it.

DulwichFox Wrote: > That is why prices in East Dulwich have become so > high. Because a certain elements of E.D. > residents > feel the need to outdo others. If makes them feel > 'Superior' > I seriously doubt that any business in East Dulwich would price their products or services based on the expectation that the customers would want to pay extra so that it confirmed their status in the community. Personally I try to avoid pub roasts, especially in London. The culinary logistics mean that you're unlikely to get food cooked to order, no matter how much you are willing to pay.

Docklands I think, Royal Docks maybe ?

Yep - no right turn - ahead only.

nxjen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Residents within the catchment area for the new > health centre in Dulwich are being invited to send > in their suggestions for naming the new health > facility. > > https://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/your-chance-t > o-name-new-health-centre-in-dulwich/?fbclid=IwAR2c > vn6ex0K2juzr0nOKE7Jl9lIjS3YD4o17ktSvo3x2kRjQqn_hAj > 1Ay9Y > > 'Please be as creative as you like, but do bear in > mind that the final name needs to be suitable for > an NHS community health centre' How about the "Can-I-have-some-of-the-?350-million-a-week-please-Boris Health Centre"

Rosetta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Does anyone know what is going to happen to the > original building? > > Melbourne Grove/Concordia, who won the bid for > this, currently has problems recruiting and > retaining GPs for their existing surgery, so how > are they going to recruit for this place? Once the new health centre building is complete and commissioned and the services that are currently run from the hospital building transferred, the central "chateaux" is being retained as part of the Charter School (God knows why but that's my opinion) and the remainder will be bulldozed to make way for additional school buildings / open space. I seem to vaguely remember that it could take until 2021 for the existing building to be decommissioned.

Minor bluetooth issue but otherwise all seems fine to me so far.

I don't think the police would take much notice of the cyclists visibility. Sure the cyclist is fool and asking for trouble, and I say this as a daily commuting cyclist who sees many similar incidents, especially in the winter. It's not the same but the recently reported case of the pedestrian hit by a cyclist whilst crossing the road looking at her phone would lead me to think the judiciary would find against the motorist, even if the cyclist could have made themselves more visible. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jun/18/woman-knocked-down-while-on-phone-wins-payout-from-cyclist I was returning from work last week when a group of 7 or 8 kids ran a red light onto the Old Kent Road in front of a bus. They then weaved their way across both lanes of the OKR, one of then doing wheelies deliberately close to the rear of the cars in front of them. It crossed my mind then as to who would be held at fault were one of them knocked off and injured.

Does anyone here use the Southwark Libary Pressreader App on an iPad ? I've been having problems with it since last weekend, it no longer opens up the publication for free and prompts you to pay which shouldn't be the case, and never was before last weekend. Funny thing is it seems to work OK via a browser on a laptop so I don't think it's my library account. I've tried reinstalling the app but that doesn't seem to help either. I've tried it on two separate iPads and both have the same issue. I've tried asking in the library too but they didn't have much of a clue either.

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I expect the RED shoes were borrowed from > Corbyn...Lorraine Kelly and her ignorant attitude > just about summed up the lefty stance for me. And > then our 'own' Jo Brand goes and finishes off the > REAL attitude of the lefty remoaners and commies - > what is she 'on'? Brain and gob link severed for > sure ...don't feed the troll..don't feed the troll...

No points, unless you can show your working out UG.

2

This is dreadful from Southwark on Instagram. Advertising the Garden Waste service as ?only ?25? like it?s a supermarket bargain of the week. Firstly it?s only ?25 for the first year and secondly how many of those ?25?s have paid for this advert ?

Top end just past the junction with Court Lane, where once stood the Fire Station.

How often do you eat out Lou, and how often locally ? If you feel forced to indulge in pizza then I feel likewise about curry about which I can honestly say I haven't partaken of on LL in over 15 years.

Not sure a Megaflow would make any difference. They're only as good as the incoming pressure/flow rate and the below site recommends a minimum of 1.5 bar & 20 l/m http://www.megaflo-unvented.co.uk/megaflo-installation.php Maybe try calling Billy Hunter - he gets a lot of recommendations on this forum for boiler installations and as he works locally he may be able to suggest a solution to your low pressure. /forum/read.php?30,1321936,2031100#msg-2031100

Agreed. I've seen no change in drivers attitudes (including my own) to the 20mph limit and police numbers are too thin to bother. Interestingly the City of London Corporation are proposing a 15mph limit. https://londonist.com/london/transport/city-speed-limit-15mph

Thames Water are supposed to guarantee a minimum of 1 bar pressure. Their code of practice says "As a guide, your first tap in your home, usually your cold kitchen tap, should be able to fill a 4.5 litre (1 gallon) bucket in 30 seconds with all the other taps and appliances turned off." https://www.thameswater.co.uk/-/media/Site-Content/Thames-Water/Help-and-Advice/Customer-Commitment/Codes-of-practice/Your-water.pdf

ZT - my comment was somewhat tongue-in-cheek. I'm sure that this is simply a corporate response to (a) the blocking of the Asda merger, (b) falling market share to the likes of Lidl and Aldi. I have every sympathy for those elderly or disabled customers who would find this service difficult to use. Personally I have used Sainsbury's online service for about 5 years now and although not perfect - and not suitable for everyone - it works for me.

James - I'm not looking for a conspiracy but this really stinks from my perspective. The street-by-street data was available for the collation of the consultation report but someone must have decided it shouldn't be included. No reason creditable reason has been given. It was made available to yourself and the other councillors and you have used it to make your recommendations. Concerns about data protection were used as an excuse for not releasing the information to the public to enable them to counter your proposals, concerns that must now be seen as false on the basis that this information - though we do not know in what form - will be included in Richard Livingstone's final report.

James - so you originally said that the street-by-street CPZ data couldn't be made public because of "due to data protection concerns." Now you say it is to be included in the final report. I don't get this. It looks as though you are deliberately withholding information that will be released after the recommendation has been made so that you can make your argument unchallenged. It's also interesting that your recommendation of the "East Dulwich Grove Area" rather than the "Melbourne Grove Area" was made partly on the basis that "it contains a group of roads where most residents oppose controlled parking", to quote your article in SE22 magazine. You have yet to demonstrate the group of roads west of the Melbourne Grove / EDG junction have a majority in favour. As I have said before, in that area we have a group of roads where we have 4 for, 6 against and 4 undecided. Hardly a majority.

ZT - do you still sit in your car at filling stations and wait for the attendant to come and put the fuel in ?

Loutwo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It seems our local historic ties with > Indian/Bangladeshi eateries is slowly coming to an > end. A heritage going back over 40 years now. If > we continue to lose these cherished stalwarts of > LL it will be the beginning of the end. "Historic ties", "Heritage", "Cherished stalwarts"....Wow ! You been on the vino again ? Keep up the hyperbole though, it's brightened the end of a pretty crap week.

Keep trolling trying.