Subscribe: SE1 Discussion
http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/rss/1
Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade A rated
Language: English
Tags:
bridge station  bridge  building site  building  london bridge  new  ownership  public ownership  quote  site  station building 
Rate this Feed
Rate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feed
Rate this feed 1 starRate this feed 2 starRate this feed 3 starRate this feed 4 starRate this feed 5 star

Comments (1)

Feed Details and Statistics Feed Statistics
Preview: SE1 Discussion

SE1 Discussion



Anything and everything to do with life in London's SE1 area. Discuss local restaurants, pubs, plays, exhibitions, shops, services, transport, planning, history, books and much more.



Published: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 13:01:59 +0000

Last Build Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 13:01:59 +0000

 



Re: Bermondsey St. heritage at risk

Tue, 23 Jan 2018 13:01:59 +0000

[quote Richard Miller][quote Gavin Smith]I'd say that the Bermondsey Street heritage - whatever that actually is - was lost years back. People who talk about "heritage" clearly have no idea what stood on Tanner Street, the height of the buildings/warehouses that stood there, or indeed what stood on the open space prior to its enlargement. In heritage terms, Bermondsey Street and its immediate surroundings were dark and dismal places. To suggest, therefore, that its heritage is at risk is a bit disingenuous. Perhaps we can be enlightened?

This is a classic case of nimbyism. The net effect of reading this thread is that I have gone to the Southwark planning website to register my support for the proposal.[/quote]

Gavin, maybe this link will help you? https://www.southwark.gov.uk/planning-and-building-control/design-and-conservation/conservation-areas?chapter=4 The Bermondsey Street Conservation area was created 45 years ago in 1973. Conservation areas are protected by law due to their special or historic architectural character and appearance.[/quote]

Not all of us have the rose tinted view of what conservation areas are and should be that you and the planners have. Again and again the special character of such areas is not preserved. Instead, it is destroyed by a descent into tweeness as policy turns the area from reality into a theme park of everything it never was.



Re: Public ownership

Tue, 23 Jan 2018 12:53:46 +0000

[quote John C][quote boroughbloke][quote John C][quote Paramount]The case for nationalisation now must be overwhelming

..Every weekend there are closures of stations and lines etc

London Bridge station still looks like a building site![/quote]

London Bridge station [i]is[/i] still a building site. Two platforms not yet open, Thameslink trains not yet running through, arcades and much of the Tooley Street frontage not yet complete.[/quote]

If you bothered to check Network Rail’s programme then you would know that the London Bridge rebuild is not due to be complete until May 2018. All that was ever promised for January was the opening of most of the new concourse, the new entrances and platforms save for the Thameslink ones. Thameslink services were not and never have been scheduled to restart before May.[/quote]

I agree, boroughbloke - but by replying to MY message you seem to be implying it was ME who hadn't bothered to check Network Rail's programme! I hope that's not what you meant. I'm perfectly aware of everything you say - that's why I said London Bridge station is still a building site. It 'looks like a building site' as Paramount put it, and quite understandably will continue to do so until the works (which I believe are currently on schedule) are complete. As a former regular user of Thameslink I'm certainly looking forward to the resumption of through services when the new timetables come in in May. And through trains to Cambridge! (It looks as if Tooley Street is due for full reopening about then as well.)[/quote]

Response was to the thread in general. Alas Paramount has not gone and checked on what Network Rail, who are, of course, a nationalised organisation anyway. Something else the poster seems to not understand.



Re: 74-84 Long Lane Tower Development

Tue, 23 Jan 2018 12:49:19 +0000

Not got a soap box. I continue to support the proposal 100%.



Re: Public ownership

Tue, 23 Jan 2018 12:13:53 +0000

[quote Paramount][quote boroughbloke][quote John C][quote Paramount]The case for nationalisation now must be overwhelming

..Every weekend there are closures of stations and lines etc

London Bridge station still looks like a building site![/quote]

London Bridge station [i]is[/i] still a building site. Two platforms not yet open, Thameslink trains not yet running through, arcades and much if the Tooley Street frontage not yet complete.[/quote]

If you bothered to check Network Rail’s programme then you would know that the London Bridge rebuild is not due to be complete until May 2018. All that was ever promised for January was the opening of most of the new concourse, the new entrances and platforms save for the Thameslink ones. Thameslink services were not and never have been scheduled to restart before May.[/quote] looks like NR are fibbers![/quote]

No, Paramount - as we've pointed out, Network Rail promised completion by May 2018 and are still promising completion by May 2018 - your earlier claim 'This London bridge debacle was due to end Xmas...' is simply WRONG! All the facilities mentioned by boroughbloke that were promised for January are up and running. So how come you're accusing NR of lying?



Re: Public ownership

Tue, 23 Jan 2018 11:47:47 +0000

[quote boroughbloke][quote John C][quote Paramount]The case for nationalisation now must be overwhelming

..Every weekend there are closures of stations and lines etc

London Bridge station still looks like a building site![/quote]

London Bridge station [i]is[/i] still a building site. Two platforms not yet open, Thameslink trains not yet running through, arcades and much if the Tooley Street frontage not yet complete.[/quote]

If you bothered to check Network Rail’s programme then you would know that the London Bridge rebuild is not due to be complete until May 2018. All that was ever promised for January was the opening of most of the new concourse, the new entrances and platforms save for the Thameslink ones. Thameslink services were not and never have been scheduled to restart before May.[/quote] looks like NR are fibbers!



Re: Public ownership

Tue, 23 Jan 2018 10:19:36 +0000

[quote boroughbloke][quote John C][quote Paramount]The case for nationalisation now must be overwhelming

..Every weekend there are closures of stations and lines etc

London Bridge station still looks like a building site![/quote]

London Bridge station [i]is[/i] still a building site. Two platforms not yet open, Thameslink trains not yet running through, arcades and much of the Tooley Street frontage not yet complete.[/quote]

If you bothered to check Network Rail’s programme then you would know that the London Bridge rebuild is not due to be complete until May 2018. All that was ever promised for January was the opening of most of the new concourse, the new entrances and platforms save for the Thameslink ones. Thameslink services were not and never have been scheduled to restart before May.[/quote]

I agree, boroughbloke - but by replying to MY message you seem to be implying it was ME who hadn't bothered to check Network Rail's programme! I hope that's not what you meant. I'm perfectly aware of everything you say - that's why I said London Bridge station is still a building site. It 'looks like a building site' as Paramount put it, and quite understandably will continue to do so until the works (which I believe are currently on schedule) are complete. As a former regular user of Thameslink I'm certainly looking forward to the resumption of through services when the new timetables come in in May. And through trains to Cambridge! (It looks as if Tooley Street is due for full reopening about then as well.)



Re: 74-84 Long Lane Tower Development

Tue, 23 Jan 2018 09:48:44 +0000

Boroughbloke,

I don't for a minute expect to dissuade you from making ill-informed comments, as I can see you are the top ranking keyboard warrior on this Forum.

But I do wish to point out a few things - mainly to give my support to all those who are making an effort to remind the planning team of their responsibilities, and to raise awareness amongst locals.

You don't know your Compass Rose. Empire Square will never cast a shadow on the proposed new development - not until the earth's orbit and rotation pattern change significantly.

The Empire Square tower casts shadow on the remaining Empire Square development only and they were built concurrently; one would have had a choice when considering buying or renting property in the development. Its distance from existing properties is about 5 times that of the development in question.

There are rules, written by Southward planners in line with government policy, regarding vicinity, loss of sunlight and and loss of daylight. I can lend you copies of all planning tools / guidelines publications. All we want is for Southward to respect these. The existing building is three storey high, not 15. We do not object new developments, but they should follow good planning guidelines.

The reason the proposed new development is now tapering away slightly from the boundary of Empire Square is because of our direct action - if you check the first issue elevations and plans visible on the planning portal, you will see that it didn't taper at all. I can lend you the 3D visualisations that we prepared and that exposed the scam at the recent consultations, so you can see for yourself the before & after effect of our efforts.
But it's still not enough and it still breaks the rules.

This monstrosity would not affect me particularly, but I would like you to be the one who explains in person to the single mother with two kids in one ground floor apartment, and the wheelchair bound lady next door, both with just two windows facing into the eastern empire square boundary,why it is acceptable that their view of a 3 meters perimeter wall adorned with green leafs (belonging to the old rugs factory) with daylight aplenty coming from above, will be replaced with a 45 meters tall wall which will negate any daylight other than what can sneak through a long, dark alley.

Over to you, we are bracing ourselves for further soap-box deliveries.



Re: Proposed new shops at the Elephant.

Tue, 23 Jan 2018 09:20:47 +0000

Southwark Council has a history of taking garages from local people and using the space to facilitate overseas developers here at The Elephant

In 2015, the Southwark administration [url=http://london-se1.co.uk/news/view/8125]destroyed our garages on the Draper Estate[/url], so they could re-site a church off the New Kent Road, to hand the prime piece of real-estate to [i]Lendlease[/i]. Residents on our estate asked that council homes be built there - it is on a housing estate after all. [url=http://www.vhh.co.uk/our-work/crossway-church]The church cost Southwark residents £4.4m to build[/url] not including the value of the land given to Lend Lease. There are no homes there, and it was built simply so that LendLease can develop the site the old church occupied

In May last year Southwark's executive decided to offer the [url=https://www.facebook.com/SaintGeorgesWard/photos/a.1282317048562478.1073741828.1277107509083432/1420115878115927/?type=3&theater]garages under Perronet[/url] to help Delancey develop the shopping centre. It seems that no community asset is safe from Southwark handing them over to developers.

Council tenants, often the most marginalised in our community are easily bullied by their landlord, and least able to retain their amenities when their landlord wants to give them away.



Re: Public ownership

Tue, 23 Jan 2018 08:22:52 +0000

[quote John C][quote Paramount]The case for nationalisation now must be overwhelming

..Every weekend there are closures of stations and lines etc

London Bridge station still looks like a building site![/quote]

London Bridge station [i]is[/i] still a building site. Two platforms not yet open, Thameslink trains not yet running through, arcades and much of the Tooley Street frontage not yet complete.[/quote]

If you bothered to check Network Rail’s programme then you would know that the London Bridge rebuild is not due to be complete until May 2018. All that was ever promised for January was the opening of most of the new concourse, the new entrances and platforms save for the Thameslink ones. Thameslink services were not and never have been scheduled to restart before May.



Re: Queen's Buildings, Scovell Road

Mon, 22 Jan 2018 22:37:36 +0000

Welcome Lea so pleased you. Have found and enjoyed reading the post's it's amazing the memories it brings back someone mentions a name or a place and your right back there. Please share your memories
Sandra



Re: Queen's Buildings, Scovell Road

Mon, 22 Jan 2018 22:32:22 +0000

Fred I have to ask about the singer word it have been Bill Powell from 86f ?



Re: Public ownership

Mon, 22 Jan 2018 21:57:49 +0000

[quote PeteStaples][quote Paramount]... all rail should be under one umbrella so blame on issues cannot be shifted around etc[/quote]

Public ownership would not solve that problem! There might be arguments for nationalisation but this is not one of them.

In principle I think it makes sense for the British government / state to own British infrastructure, rather than selling it to French or Chinese government-owned companies. But I don't know why anyone would think government ownership would result in a better service.[/quote] it would solve problem as they could not blame someone else and heads would roll as happened occasionally on BR watch.... even Peter Hitchens supports return of BR or similar



Re: Public ownership

Mon, 22 Jan 2018 21:54:02 +0000

[quote Paramount][quote PeteStaples][quote Paramount]... all rail should be under one umbrella so blame on issues cannot be shifted around etc[/quote]

Public ownership would not solve that problem! There might be arguments for nationalisation but this is not one of them.

In principle I think it makes sense for the British government / state to own British infrastructure, rather than selling it to French or Chinese government-owned companies. But I don't know why anyone would think government ownership would result in a better service.[/quote][/quote] BR was glorious compared to this lot of private companies... not all British organizations.
This London bridge debacle was due to end Xmas... perhaps they omitted to say which Xmas. They are having a laugh at our expense.... the quality of rail operations is abysmally deficient.. in the 50 60s we had decent catering on train. Harrods standards almost and 3 sittings for breakfast lunch dinner were called by the black white life died attendant with a smile etc... or did I imagine that also?



Re: Public ownership

Mon, 22 Jan 2018 21:45:27 +0000

[quote PeteStaples][quote Paramount]... all rail should be under one umbrella so blame on issues cannot be shifted around etc[/quote]

Public ownership would not solve that problem! There might be arguments for nationalisation but this is not one of them.

In principle I think it makes sense for the British government / state to own British infrastructure, rather than selling it to French or Chinese government-owned companies. But I don't know why anyone would think government ownership would result in a better service.[/quote]



Re: Public ownership

Mon, 22 Jan 2018 21:01:25 +0000

Clearly a poster who wants an end to new trains, modernisation and station rebuilds. Renationalisation will do exactly that. Just as it did under good olde British Rail.



Re: Bermondsey St. heritage at risk

Mon, 22 Jan 2018 18:13:50 +0000

Appreciate you sharing the link, Richard, but it changes nothing to the substance of what I said - comments which I stand by. Indeed, I was aware at the time of making my original comments of the designation.



Re: Bermondsey St. heritage at risk

Mon, 22 Jan 2018 17:54:30 +0000

[quote Gavin Smith]I'd say that the Bermondsey Street heritage - whatever that actually is - was lost years back. People who talk about "heritage" clearly have no idea what stood on Tanner Street, the height of the buildings/warehouses that stood there, or indeed what stood on the open space prior to its enlargement. In heritage terms, Bermondsey Street and its immediate surroundings were dark and dismal places. To suggest, therefore, that its heritage is at risk is a bit disingenuous. Perhaps we can be enlightened?

This is a classic case of nimbyism. The net effect of reading this thread is that I have gone to the Southwark planning website to register my support for the proposal.[/quote]

Gavin, maybe this link will help you? https://www.southwark.gov.uk/planning-and-building-control/design-and-conservation/conservation-areas?chapter=4 The Bermondsey Street Conservation area was created 45 years ago in 1973. Conservation areas are protected by law due to their special or historic architectural character and appearance.



Re: Carpenter recommendation

Mon, 22 Jan 2018 17:21:15 +0000

Yep - we also use Rob for all odd jobs - reliable and affordable!



Re: Public ownership

Mon, 22 Jan 2018 15:52:56 +0000

[quote Paramount]... all rail should be under one umbrella so blame on issues cannot be shifted around etc[/quote]

Public ownership would not solve that problem! There might be arguments for nationalisation but this is not one of them.

In principle I think it makes sense for the British government / state to own British infrastructure, rather than selling it to French or Chinese government-owned companies. But I don't know why anyone would think government ownership would result in a better service.



Re: Carpenter recommendation

Mon, 22 Jan 2018 09:29:58 +0000

Thumbs up for Rob. He's a very skilled carpenter and we've used him many times



Re: Bakerloo Line Extension

Mon, 22 Jan 2018 08:58:48 +0000

Going slightly off topic, but I wouldn't want to see the flyover demolished. That horse has long bolted. The flyover and roundabout system was built at huge cost to the community in terms of the loss of the Mayflower Gardens, reconfiguration of roads and consequent loss of heritage in terms of important buildings and landmarks. Looking at some old pictures will show you just how much the community lost back then. That said, the massive throughput of traffic meant a flyover and reconfiguration was a necessary evil back then. That has not changed. If anything, the need for the flyover and roundabout is more acute now than ever. By all means let's get a station built there and encourage more people to use it where practicable for them to do so, but where would we put the cars that use the flyover? How would cars and other vehicles negotiate the junction that is Bricklayers' Arms?



Re: Bakerloo Line Extension

Sun, 21 Jan 2018 23:05:21 +0000

In response to an FOI request (not mine) TfL has released its more detailed assessment of potential station sites:

http://foi.tfl.gov.uk/FOI-2158-1718/2518-1718_OKRStnSites.pdf



Re: BEWARE THIEF in Royal Mail Mandela Way Office

Sun, 21 Jan 2018 21:08:53 +0000

[quote missjonesse1]i have had too many packages disappear to count and identity theft from credit cards being stolen. the delivery morons can't read, apart from a few lovely locals working there, so many are foreign without a solid grasp of english, it's impossible. so many packages letters addressed to other people in the area arrive in our front door. have to be dropped down the road. sick of it.
mandela way isn't just one person.. it's a group of thieves. it's organised crime. [/quote] So of course you have proof for all this and/or informed the police accordingly. Also, your call to people to stop their deliveries going there could lose the lovely locals there their job.



Re: Public ownership

Sun, 21 Jan 2018 18:49:26 +0000

[quote James Hatts]Network Rail - which maintains the infrastructure - is already nationalised[/quote] NR is more of a quango really.. My son is on their staff but essentially train operators are private... all rail should be under one umbrella so blame on issues cannot be shifted around etc



Re: Carpenter recommendation

Sun, 21 Jan 2018 16:20:11 +0000

Possibly a job that Rob Lancaster (07950190530) could tackle. There are other recommendations for him on this site.



Re: BEWARE THIEF in Royal Mail Mandela Way Office

Sun, 21 Jan 2018 15:18:36 +0000

i have had too many packages disappear to count and identity theft from credit cards being stolen. the delivery morons can't read, apart from a few lovely locals working there, so many are foreign without a solid grasp of english, it's impossible. so many packages letters addressed to other people in the area arrive in our front door. have to be dropped down the road. sick of it.
mandela way isn't just one person.. it's a group of thieves. it's organised crime. don't get anything delivered there, deliver to your friend or office instead, with bank go online and ask for new cards to come by a special delivery.. you can't trust ROYAL MAIL any more. report to mp and head of the post office phil.northage@royalmail.com



Re: Public ownership

Sun, 21 Jan 2018 12:34:21 +0000

[quote Paramount]The case for nationalisation now must be overwhelming

..Every weekend there are closures of stations and lines etc

London Bridge station still looks like a building site![/quote]

London Bridge station [i]is[/i] still a building site. Two platforms not yet open, Thameslink trains not yet running through, arcades and much of the Tooley Street frontage not yet complete.



Re: Public ownership

Sun, 21 Jan 2018 12:26:24 +0000

Network Rail - which maintains the infrastructure - is already nationalised



Public ownership

Sun, 21 Jan 2018 11:11:05 +0000

The case for nationalisation now must be overwhelming

..Every weekend there are closures of stations and lines etc

London Bridge station still looks like a building site!



Re: Proposed new shops at the Elephant.

Sun, 21 Jan 2018 09:52:20 +0000

Totally agree with Boroughbloke. I also have some experience working with retail centre owners. It's a very flawed design, a dungeon, a fantasy that will cause more problems than it will solve. The layout - as a dead end - will mean few traders have passing footfall. It's already a fairly quiet corner anyway. The exterior of the arcade is mostly taken up by the existing pharmacy and the cafe. The original draft proposal for a entrance at the back of Perronet House and front was pulled because of complaints about disturbance to residents, although the disturbance would still be caused by servicing at the rear for the 12 businesses. It's a confused concept. The pitch deck presented it as inspired by some of the most down at heel retail spaces in South London, but the architect behind is Carl Turner whose speciality is hipster hangouts like Pop Brixton. His visualisations of the proposal reveal its hipster aspirations - i.e. high margin businesses that don't need high footfall. To try and solve this the facade of Perronet House will need to have a great deal of commercial signage added to it - Carl's proposal shows just the Elephant Arcade branding, no communication for what this arcade actually offers, yet his down at heel references show these spaces need the businesses inside need to be promoted on the outside. Unpleasant. The proposed area was designed for parking and storage. It has a low ceiling, many low concrete beams, drainage pipes, man hole covers. Mr Patel at the pharmacy told me he struggled to make his space work and chose not to use nearly as much space as his planning application had originally granted him because it was unworkable. In the arcade proposal all but the cafe business will be given a space little bigger than a parking bay, with no natural light... a cell. Outside there are problems too. The concrete beams overhanging outside are dangerously low - this is the view of TfL, conveyed to me on a walkabout in 2015 when we were reviewing the estate boundary in the context of the pavement resurfacing - TfL were keen to hack at them but the council officers and I with them made the case that the pedestrian desire line was away from the danger. The proposed arcade will lead to greater risk of head injury - is Carl Turner's ludicrously impractical hanging garden meant to soften the blow? False land grab. The space proposed was a well tenanted garage space, seized by the council in 2013 on the grounds of making space for the pharmacy but then abandoned for nearly 4 years. During this time the council's lacklustre security meant intruders broke in and set up camp. Some of this spilled over into the adjacent garage area which has been an ongoing battle with the council to have secured - I finally got my own contractor to devise a spec, give me a quote and forced the council to deliver it. Prior to the council's 2013 decant of this area there were no anti-social issues in the garages. Yet Cllr Cryan pretends that this arcade is being built to solve anti-social problems inside the basement and outside street crime! There's a long waiting list for garages and storage here, spaces that any local resident can apply for. Taking this out of circulation means more demand for car parking on streets. Surely better to keep pa[...]