Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Louisa Wrote:

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

> So a bit of wind and rain the odd tree comes down

> etc etc... I do often have to bite my tongue when

> it comes to British weather stories. We even have

> a local councillor offering live updates on the

> situation. I guess it's good preparation for the

> half inch of snow we may see in January.

>

> Louisa.


I'm guessing the families of the three people who have been killed in this storm wouldn't dismiss its severity quite so lightly.

I agree it's better to be safe than sorry. But post 87 we seem to have taken precaution to an elevated extreme. We live with the effects of the jet stream on a daily basis, our climate is dictated by its force. October is usually one of the most potent months for its full force with system after system attacking us from the west. I understand why infrastructure needs to be cautious, but does it really mean we need to come to a standstill? We can't use the argument, as we do with the snow, that our country isn't prepared for it, because we are an Atlantic facing country which has always dealt with storms of this and a similar nature.


Louisa.

Just made it into the city. If anyone's thinking of getting on the buses...


The 40 was get-onable all the way from the Library to the LL Post Office, but all other buses went straight through. Buses then emptied and refilled again at Denmark Hill and Elephant & Castle, so if you want a 176 or 185 my tip would be to hop onto a 40 and then change at one of those.


Roads weren't too busy, it took about 40 mins to Monument from Lordship Lane.


Good luck.

> but does it really mean we need to come to a standstill?


Have we? Trains can't run on obstructed lines, of which there have been dozens across the country, nor traffic on blocked roads, but apart from that, things are happening.


> We can't use the argument, as we do with the snow, that our country isn't prepared for it


I don't think anyone is using that argument. Let's see how many of the blockages remain this afternoon or evening. I see the ED rail service is coming back into service now.

> but does it really mean we need to come to a standstill?


Have we? Trains can't run on obstructed lines, of which there have been dozens across the country, nor traffic on blocked roads, but apart from that, things are happening.


> We can't use the argument, as we do with the snow, that our country isn't prepared for it


I don't think anyone is using that argument. Let's see how many of the blockages remain this afternoon or evening. I see the ED rail service, at least the West Croydon branch, is getting back into operation now. http://www.southernrailway.com/your-journey/plan-your-journey/live-running-information/EDW/departures/

The timing of the highest wind speeds meant checking lines and clearing fallen trees could only take place durin the rushhours.

Can't imagine anyone would favour risks of derailments over checking lines for trees when we know many will have fallen down.


I think it's a credit to London that a 1 in 25 year event occuring during the rush hour will cause disruption mostly until lunch time but essential activities are all going ahead.

So do we prepare by felling trees that are within falling

distance of a line ?


Doesn't seem right for a once in 30 years !! If it happened

every year however.




ianr Wrote:

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

> > but does it really mean we need to come to a

> standstill?

>

> Have we? Trains can't run on obstructed lines, of

> which there have been dozens across the country,

> nor traffic on blocked roads, but apart from that,

> things are happening.

>

> > We can't use the argument, as we do with the

> snow, that our country isn't prepared for it

>

> I don't think anyone is using that argument.

> Let's see how many of the blockages remain this

> afternoon or evening. I see the ED rail service

> is getting back into operation now.

> http://www.southernrailway.com/your-journey/plan-y

> our-journey/live-running-information/EDW/departure

> s/

Southern have announced their temporary timetable for today.


EAST DULWICH/PECKHAM RYE: 2 trains per hour to and from West Croydon. Beckenham Junction trains are cancelled.


FOREST HILL/HONOR OAK PARK: 1 train per hour to Caterham (East Croydon). Outer South London line services to Victoria are cancelled. Northbound services to London Bridge are not operating due to a fallen tree between Forest Hill & Sydenham.


London Overground services continue to start from New Cross Gate/New Cross with no services to Denmark Hill, Peckham Rye, Forest Hill and Honor Oak Park.

No trains from Victoria to Peckham Rye / Nunhead today.


Also I see on Twitter the protected willow tree in Nunhead has come down. I hope they don't use it a justification to extend the proposed development opposite Nunhead green.

Be aware that it is still chaos on the trains, and no one seems to know what is going on. I just wasted an hour at London Bridge, as the 14.25 to Beckenham was on the board as on time, but just disappeared. Then the14.40 platform was announced, so we all piled on. Sat there till 3pm with no announcement as to what was happening. I got off he train to find out, but none of the dozen or so men in uniform on the concourse had any idea apart from that they were "waiting for a driver"! And no one seemed interested in finding out. I understand that rolling stock and staff are not going to be in the right places, but for goodness sakes let us know what is going on, and don't announce trains that don't have drivers!

antantant Wrote:

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

> No trains from Victoria to Peckham Rye / Nunhead

> today.

>

> Also I see on Twitter the protected willow tree in

> Nunhead has come down. I hope they don't use it a

> justification to extend the proposed development

> opposite Nunhead green.


Oh no! What a pity - lovely tree. I suspect your fears about the proposed development will be correct.

You get the suspicion the children are off and rail cancellations are always worse then.


Work is full of singletons.:)



antantant Wrote:

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

> No trains from Victoria to Peckham Rye / Nunhead

> today.

>

> Also I see on Twitter the protected willow tree in

> Nunhead has come down. I hope they don't use it a

> justification to extend the proposed development

> opposite Nunhead green.

Considering that the meteorologists were able to predict this storm on the basis of some minor chinks in some isobars off Florida, that had not even grown to being a storm yet, I think it is pretty astounding how they not only predicted what would happen but where it would happen. The technology has improved but more importantly the skills of the meteorologists to make sense of what they are seeing. Hoorah!

muffins78 Wrote:

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


> Got on the 40 at Aldgate and there are seats etc.

> so hopefully things won't be too bad for everyone

> getting home.


Given the 40 starts at Aldgate, I would expect there to be seats.


Secondly, most of us cant leave before 5pm. Lucky for those who work part time.

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

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, AFAICS, the "civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300" were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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