ed_pete

http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/100011/transport_and_streets/3431/borough_wide_20mph_speed_limit

Made me smile.. http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?9,1582039

Seems to have worked in Wales: Is the charge working? The single use carrier bag charge was introduced to reduce the number of single use bags used. In July 2012, the Welsh Government released a brief summary covering 13 retailers which showed reductions of 35 ? 96% since the launch of the carrier bag charge. This information, available below, is broken down by retail sector. Food retail - between 96% and 70% reductions; Fashion - between 75% and 68% reductions; Home improvement - 95% reduction; Food service - up to 45% reduction; Telecommunications - 85% reduction. http://www.carrierbagchargewales.gov.uk/progress/chargeworking/?lang=en

You really don't like JB do you ? And as for slating what I presume is the Abbotswood Road estate, I not sure the residents would be so enamored with your description: "We'd probably have ended up with a horrible housing development of poor architectural poor quality, like the one next to Dulwich Hamlet FC."

James - you said "NHS property explained they would need an extra 23 years before they vacate the bulk of the site to plan and build new health facilities." Are you seriously saying that the hospital site won't be vacated until 2038 ? No - 2019-20 at the latest which I agree is still too long given how long it has been so far. As for keeping the central chateau - that is it not a given.

Unlikely on the hospital site as I don't think there is sufficient space. It would be great if they could do a deal with St Saviours and St Olaves girls school given the proximity of that field on Greendale. I even think there is a tunnel under the railway line at the back of the site that could make access to the playing fields even easier.

I can't get the search function to work. I type (e.g.) "curry" and nothing comes back - is it just me ?

Just to clarify, I think James meant 2-3 years not 23 years.

I'm not so sure. I think some of the buildings are temporary but some will form part of the core school buildings. For example I believe that they plan to site the school sports hall/gym at the western end of the site in place of the existing buildings that were at one time (I think) hospital staff accommodation.

Pushing this out to the wider community as I'm not sure how many would have seen the original post in the Family Room. I'd encourage anyone who has an interest in the design and architecture of local buildings to go along, regardless of whether or not you have children. The new school will be a highly visible piece of public architecture that will hopefully be in place for many, many years so it's really important you take the opportunity to express your views. http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?29,1578200

Welcome to the EDF. Why not take a look at this thread in the what's on section, it could be a start. http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?6,841313,1577891,page=31#msg-1577891

Better idea to report directly: https://forms.southwark.gov.uk/ShowForm.asp?fm_fid=276 or simply email [email protected] or ring 020 7525 2000 (24 hours)

KestonKid Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Having run out of the Council free bags for food > recycling I have been looking in vain to buy small > compostable bags to fit a kitchen caddy. Can > anyone advise where they are to be found? Posted above: http://www.caddylinersdirect.co.uk/shop/

Bike Hangers were approved as part of the last CGS round but no reason why you can't have more. http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s54789/Dulwich%20Bike%20Hangars%20CC%20Report.pdf As regards food waste - it might be worth consider requesting a few hot bins. If used properly these are supposed to break down all types of food waste not just vegetable matter. http://www.hotbincomposting.com/

James - how about using some CGS funding to work with Network Rail to landscape the slopes either side of the platforms at the station ?

Sorry to be a wet blanket but I'm not sure how LED lights meets the CGS criteria. ? Ideas for cleaner: bin storage, schemes to deter fly tipping, designing out grotspots. ? Ideas for greener: tree and flower planting, community gardens, wildlife areas. ? Ideas for safer: lighting, fencing, bicycle storage to prevent theft. Yes lighting meets the safer criteria but adding lighting to street trees where street lights already exist is not really within the spirit of the rules IMO.

emc - really glad that you've got your money back and HSBC are taking the matter very seriously. You might want to check your last post. You might want to be careful about making unsubstantiated allegations on a public forum from a legal point of view IMO.

Andrew1011 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > > Assuming Harris Primary planning is already > > complete then there should be some Transport > > impact somewhere in the planning documents. > > It isn't complete. Andrew if you search the Southwark planning portal for application number 14/AP/4580, the Harris Primary School, application, you can see the Transport Assessment document produced in December 2014 by a firm called Transport Planning Associates. I'd attach it but the document is too large.

A couple of things. I recall that both James Barber and Helen Hayes were late for the start of the meeting but both were in place before the anti barrier deputation started. I think that the chair should have allowed more time on the agenda for this topic as there were voices that went unheard both within the deputation and the audience. The development of the Charter School East Dulwich and the new Health Centre will both require Transport Assessments as part of the planning process and I don't think these will be carried out by Southwark, more likley a specialist consultancy on behalf of the planning applicant. I suspect that these will consider the traffic impact on the surrounding roads but I doubt that either will stretch as far as Townley for instance. I'm not sure either whether they will provide the kind of data that people are looking for in relation to the perceived MG issues. A guide to what is included is shown here http://planningguidance.planningportal.gov.uk/blog/guidance/travel-plans-transport-assessments-and-statements-in-decision-taking/transport-assessments-and-statements/ Assuming Harris Primary planning is already complete then there should be some Transport impact somewhere in the planning documents. I think the reason Matt Hill from the council suggested that the study be restricted to MG but consider impacts on the surrounding roads was due to the amount it would cost (ie more than the sanctioned ?10k) but I may have misheard as people were talking across one another and the acoustics in the church aren't too great.

Fair point and I?m aware that it?s Mayoral policy to increase cycling in London generally. Hopefully the alterations to this junction will help in that regard though I doubt the change is likely to take effect overnight.

Wow - I though Tessa had it in the bag.

Going back the original Southwark consultation which stated: "The key aim of the proposals is to significantly improve safety for cyclists and pedestrians at the junction, whilst ensuring that there is no adverse delay to traffic on East Dulwich Grove." If a couple of children have said that they think its an improvement and my own have said the same. That's good then isn't it ? And that's all it is. No one is trying to use this as justification for whole exercise. No one was ever said that less children will be driven because of changes to junction. Jeez.

Telegraph article. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/gardening/gardens-to-visit/New-York-glamour-comes-to-Peckham/

I don't think selective quotations are that helpful really, for example one of the last nights deputation said in an earlier post: Actually, if barriers were put in at both the Lordship Lane junction and EDG junction of Melbourne, that would create a blissful environment for all of us... I agree with you on the disparaging view of the forum by other councillors though, Charlie Smith especially, who as an elected representative for East Dulwich I thought that most arrogant and ill-informed (sorry John K no mp3 available). Sure there is a real world outside the EDF and huge swathes probably go nowhere near it but I though his comment disappointing.

http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,1563597,page=1 :)