Jump to content

Recommended Posts

It is the right decision from the council. The Aylesham Centre has proposals for redevelopment into more intensive retail space with housing attached. Planning is about balance. And the cinema and other cultural uses of the car park, maintain that balance between retail, housing and the arts that have come to define Rye Lane in recent years.

Louisa Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Excellent news indeed, but I fear it?s probably an

> open invitation for a large chain cinema to now

> bid on the downstairs space as the security of a

> longer lease beckons.

>

> Louisa.


Fear not Louisa, Peckhamplex has a very long lease (much longer than the other entities on the site), the only way they would be removed is if their lease were compulsorily purchased to enable redevelopment which, thanks to the excellent work of PeckhamVision, isn't going ahead.

The "New Southwark Plan - Area Visions and Site Allocations" has identified possible development spaces in the borough for more than 40,000 dwellings. And it also makes it clear that town centres such as Peckham need leisure facilities and other amenities to prevent whole areas from becoming 'dormitories'. So this is a good piece of news.

Henry_17 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Rendel,

>

> 83 new abodes could have come in handy. Is it

> enVisioned that they will be developed elsewhere?


Of course we need more housing - though given Southwark's record at Elephant Park etc one very much doubts there would have been much affordable social housing (even under the current very stretched definition) - but that doesn't mean it's appropriate to gut a town centre of much-needed and much-loved amenities and simply plank down tower blocks willy-nilly.

Just been reading in the PP that two lots of new housing, one in Peckham (smaller development, built on a car park) and one further afield (at least three towers of ascending height, one 40 storeys) have been criticised by locals, one of whom (in the case of the former) waxed very lyrical about not wanting to miss seeing vapour trails and puddles. I like whimsy, but much prefer people to be housed in places that aren't miles away from the centre of London in already established areas. Fact is, if you accept that London is an attractive place to live then you have to accept that more needs to be done to house all the people who come here - from the rest of the UK and beyond. Puddle gazing comes a very solid second to housing.

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I agree that the carpets could do with a deep

> clean (or preferably being taken up and

> incinerated) but in PP's defence it has (at least

> in the gents' version) some of the most salubrious

> lavatories in this neck of the woods!



The Ladies aren't bad either :))


But yes it would be good to see those carpets disappear ......


Went to see Blade Runner there last week.


Six quid (for the 3D version). Compared to fourteen quid in East Dulwich (not for the 3D version).


Worth the walk :))

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • “There was an excellent discussion on Newscast last night between the BBC Political Editor, the director of the IFS and the director of More In Common - all highly intelligent people with no party political agenda ” I would call this “generous”   Labour should never have made that tax promise because, as with - duh - Brexit, it’s pretending the real world doesn’t exist now. I blame Labour in no small part for this delusion. But the electorate need to cop on as well.  They think they can have everything they want without responsibilities, costs or attachments. The media encourage this  Labour do need to raise taxes. The country needs it.  Now, exactly how it’s done remains to be seen. But if people are just going to go around going “la la laffer curve. Liars! String em up! Vote someone else” then they just aren’t serious people reckoning with the problem yes Labour are more than a year into their term, but after 14 years of what the Tories  did? Whoever takes over, has a major problem 
    • Messaging, messaging, messaging. That's all it boils down to. There are only so many fiscal policies out there, and they're there for the taking, no matter which party you're in. I hate to say it, but Farage gets it right every time. Even when Reform reneges on fiscal policy, it does it with enough confidence and candidness that no one is wringing their hands. Instead, they're quietly admired for their pragmatism. Strangely, it's exactly the same as Labour has done, with its manifesto reverse on income tax, but it's going to bomb.  Blaming the Tories / Brexit / Covid / Putin ... none of it washes with the public anymore  - it wants to be sold a vision of the future, not reminded of the disasters of the past. Labour put itself on the back foot with its 'the tories fucked it all up' stance right at the beginning of its tenure.  All Lammy had to do (as with Reeves and Raynor etc) was say 'mea culpa. We've made a mistake, we'll fix it. Sorry guys, we're on it'. But instead it's 'nothing to see here / it's someone else's fault / I was buying a suit / hadn't been briefed yet'.  And, of course, the press smells blood, which never helps.  Oh! And Reeve's speech on Wednesday was so drab and predictable that even the journalists at the press conference couldn't really be arsed to come up with any challenging questions. 
    • Niko 07818 607 583 has been doing jobs for us for several years, he is reliable, always there for us, highly recommended! 
    • I am keeping my fingers crossed the next few days are not so loud. I honestly think it is the private, back garden displays that are most problematic as, in general, there is no way of knowing when and where they might happen. For those letting off a few bangers in the garden I get it is tempting to think what's the harm in a few minutes of 'fun', but it is the absolute randomness of sudden bangs that can do irreparable damage to people and animals. With organised events that are well advertised there is some forewarning at least, and the hope is that organisers of such events can be persuaded to adopt and make a virtue of using only low noise displays in future.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...