peterstorm1985

Shankley Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Well if that is the case then surely no loft > conversion would be granted under permitted > development because they would be within 2 meters > of the boundary (if terraced) or over 3 meters > high? > Getting more confused!! There is nothing to restrict a loft conversion where the roof is already high enough, which is why there are loads of legal loft conversions in ED. If you look at the pictures in the guidance notes you will see that in this type of extension the eaves are unchanged (so they won't be subject to any restriction - it's only what you change that needs to be considered.) The problem arises where a separate section of roof is at a much lower level. The row of houses behind me is terraced and all have the rear return. I've looked at all the loft conversions and I think I approve of Southwark's stance. The (six) extensions that I can see solely in the main roof don't have any significant effect on the neighbours. But there is one portakabin type on the return (that I assume to be illegal, as the original roof was much lower) that must block the light to the window of the upper storey of the adjacent house as the sun moves round during the day. It's also hideous.

Shankley Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If I understand it correctly (and I probably > don't!) the reason it has to be considered under > Class A in addition to class B is because of the > fact that the flat Roof on the rear addition > (loft) joins onto the roof of the main house, > correct? I think you may be reading this the wrong way round. Class B relates to additions and alterations to the roofs which Southwark agree is complied with. Class A is for extensions to the house (which Southwark consider includes any additional roof). It doesn't matter whether the roof on the rear return joins on to the main roof or not, it will still be part of the house which is subject to Class A.

Alec John Moore Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It must be a reasonable business proposition if > they are expanding into bigger premises up the > road. I'm sure charities get preferential terms on > business rates etc. The reduction in rates is so significant (min 80% reduction, discretionary to 100%) that an owner of a shop may offer a charity rent free use if they are having trouble finding a commercial tenant after the standard rate free period for a property that has become empty. There has been some discussion of this in the press recently as charity shops have been popping up in high numbers. Previously owners of low rateable value properties were able to have rate relief if their shop was empty but the threshold for this relief has changed.

What penguin68 says makes perfect sense. When I suggested a calculator I didn't just mean for volumetric purposes. I'm afraid the Permitted Development rules are very clearly more than a matter of cubic metres. It really is worth sitting down with a (Very large) glass of something and reading through the document. Changes of roof line are a definite no no. Out of interest, how do you know that other councils interpret the rules differently? It may not be a matter of interpretation; perhaps there is an additional local planning relaxation (perhaps due to a greater shortage of family housing etc).

Atticus - have you had your calculator out and checked through the permitted developments rules yourself to see if the design your architect came up with appears to comply? The reason that I ask is that you refer to this 'sort of' project but the permitted development rules don't refer to any standard type of extension in that way. The rules are simply a matter of dimensions from the 'existing' building. When your architect says that this sort of project is allowed under permitted development that may of course be true, because there is nothing specifically preventing that 'sort', but it may be that yours is not allowed simply because it's too big in one or more directions. Unfortunately, Loft design companies want to sell extensions and they are perhaps not as concerned about the legalities as they should be - if you don't apply for a certificate then compliance isn't tested until you sell your property and unless you've written into the contract that they are liable to ensure compliance then they won't be too bothered (And as loft companies don't always last that long, it's safest to get the certificate). And once one extension goes up in a street of identical houses there is an assumption that it complied and others follow. I think this is the direct link to the document that helenat1970 refers to. Lengthy (probably too long for some professionals to wade through) but simple enough for mere mortals to understand. Permitted Dev document By the way, have you asked Southwark to explain what was wrong with your plan? It would be good to know what their objection was.

acumenman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Franklins farm shop would suffer very little as it > is a permanent fixture, > > and the market would be only for Sundays I > presume. Are you sure it wouldn't be harmed? Sundays are one half of the available shopping days for a large number of ED residents, certainly those with the cash to make principled decisions about food (don't try and tell me that Franklins is a discount store), so I would have thought the effect would be significant.

Everything Marmoraman say is of course true. We do already have access to a wide range of good fruit and veg* in LL so it would be very unlikely that any farmers market would be set up on Goose Green. But if you can demonstrate enough demand you may get interest (I think you'd need to be suggesting a site away from LL) so perhaps if everyone who is interested contacts www.lfm.org.uk then we can see what happens. There are a number of different organisations who run farmers markets, some with more stringent rules on local produce than others, which is why some people's experience of them includes jars of olives (I've never heard of a commercial grower of olives in the UK) and others will only have seen goods grown within 100 miles. If there was to be a farmers market I would only frequent one that had a strict 'grown in 100 miles' policy. (Some markets, including Dulwich, allow 'produced within 100 miles' which if it's marinating an olive is a bit like 'packed in the UK' that appears on so much in the supermarket) *If we did get a farmers market I would imagine that Franklins farm shop would immediately go out of business.

If Goose Green was used every week it would soon ruin the grass and become a mudbath. It's also a bit limited in terms of space for the vans/lorries. There's more space to move around on Peckham Rye if the grass suffers and more parking. It might also be seen to have a wider catchment area (a bit further from the farmer's market in Brixton), which would encourage more stallholders.

Saturdays can be far too busy to shop locally and a lot of us can't get to the shops during the working day so the supermarket can become a necessity for some. But the problem with any scheme to resolve this is that it will cost more money for the shopkeeper and I doubt there'd be enough return for them to swallow the costs themselves. Also, although it would be great if you could pick up your shopping at the end of the day, where would it all be stored - most of the local shops are short of space already? The only thing I could think of is a late day once a week. If all the shops could be convinced to open 2 hours later in the morning and close 2 hours later (so still keeping the same day length) then it could make things easier for a lot of residents. Of course, this would need the shop staff to be happy with the new arrangement.

languagelounger Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Are the London stores franchises - like this?:- > > The Grocer - Southern Co-op to offer franchises > I don't believe so; the last email I got from them (after I made a complaint) said they were passing the detail onto their area Operations manager, so I would take that to mean that the LL branch is part of the core business

mynamehere Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What about the part of the Channel 4 programme > that showed the dairy farmer crying because the > big supermarkets have forced him and others out of > business.... Sorry to go off topic a little but some might be interested in this quote from a National Farmers Union meeting in November 2010 which complained bitterly about the supermarkets' treatment of farmers. Except perhaps for one.... "Am I pleased that the Coop have made a commitment to set up a dedicated supply chain? Of course I am. Via dedicated supply chains 20 to 25 per cent of dairy farmers are receiving better prices." I don't know how far this has gone but any 'member' of the Co-op can go to the members meeting in Croydon on 7th May and ask.

Sue I've generally been using the contact form on their website Co-op contact The last reply I got was from Danielle.lewis@co-operative.coop so it may be worth emailing her directly. Mynamehere - I agree with you but if you're worried about the price of milk (it simply isn't enough to sustain traditional dairy farming) then why not just buy milk from a milkman or from smaller food shops e.g. SMBS. It's because the major supermarkets sell such a high volume of milk that they are able to wield such power, and in many cases use milk as a loss leader. I split my post about 'the people's supermarket' into two (discount/higher quality) as I'm not convinced it can address both issues at once in the UK. Fair treatment of suppliers can only sit with higher quality so I guess success will depend on how many people are prepared to pay (whether it be in time or money) for their principles. Hopefully, Lousiana's report will include that aspect.

I watched the Channel 4 programme last night but I didn't come away with a particularly positive feeling. The discount rate being offered didn't seem to be enough compared to the voluntary hours required. If I'm going to volunteer for 4 hours then I would expect to reduce my food bill by the equivalent amount that I would earn if I worked those 4 hours (even at minimum wage level the sum doesn't work). As a keen supporter of local shops I would want to continue to use the butcher and the fishmonger so the remainder of my monthly shopping simply isn't a high enough value. I wouldn't be too keen on this model if, to make it work, members stopped using any other food shops on Lordship Lane. Alternatively, I might consider volunteering for a supermarket that stocked much higher quality and more interesting produce, equivalent to a farmers market, but I can see a conflict in what volunteers may want out of the shop. This appeared to be the case in the programme last night - one new member seemed very keen until she saw that prices didn't beat the local pound shop, and a few quizzical stares at the globe artichokes suggested that the demographics might not mean everyone wanted the same thing. But I look forward to the report. Re the Co-op, what about us trying to 'take it back'. I've started emailing, regularly, to complain about specific failures. I'm sure others do too, but if the number of complainers increased they would eventually take notice.

I suspect that some young people simply do not realise how easy it is to kill - too many 'know' friends who have been stabbed and lived to tell the tale (and often bear the scars with pride). Angry young men and women, fuelled by drugs and alcohol, will sometimes turn violent; it has always been so. An empty hand will have a limited chance of killing. Put a knife or gun in that hand and we know the result. Unfortunately, as Tarot's very sad post demonstrates, weapons come in many forms, but I do wonder if metal detectors in all major venues might prevent some incidences.

DJKillaQueen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > We try to do as much as we can through our TRA for > all aspects of community cohesion. TRA's can be a > very good means for doing things and the local > council supports those that do a good job. Apologies if this was stated somewhere else in this thread and I missed it, but what is a TRA?

Perhaps I live on the wrong street or go shopping at the wrong times but I've only rarely seen any community wardens. The only time I have ever seen them in my street there were two of them having a really good chat with each other but paying little attention to anything else that was happening (I had to ask twice for them to move so I could pass them on the pavement). Their gait and general demeanour didn't give me any confidence that they would leap into action if needed. Maybe I'm unlucky, or perhaps my street isn't seen as a priority (this may be the case, as it's a busy street and there are always lots of people to keep an eye on things). I'd be really pleased to hear any examples of how the community wardens have done a good job in the area.

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > But do you think it should open on Sundays or not? No I don't. I do wonder if there would be sufficient sales to justify the cost of opening another day. I've heard plenty of people say that they would like it to be open on a Sunday but the reasons given tend to suggest that it would be useful as a tourist attraction. "A good place to take the parents/guests staying for the weekend", is a typical reaction when I've canvassed neighbour's opinions. I too might amble along there before heading for lunch in the pub but I doubt whether I'd buy anything. If I did, it would only be because I had delayed my visit by a day. I think that if Southwark are serious about surveying the value of Sunday trading they should ask "and how much would you spend, in addition to the amount you spend on Saturdays?" when they ask who wants it.

ianr Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > And, before I > take it back, if / when I go to Aldi again, could > it conceivably have been affected by other stuff > in the fridge -- say lemons or blue cheese? But > that said, it was securely wrapped. As it was a different brand it could just be that the milk they use has a taste that isn't as pleasant rather than actually being rancid. It's worth comparing the country of origin. Otherwise, if lemons/blue cheese affected the flavour it would be unlikely to penetrate very far, so try cutting into the middle and tasting a bit at the centre. If the butter has started to 'go off' you'll usually find that the outer surface changes colour - it tends to go a brighter yellow. I always choose products from the back of the shelf as I've seen too many items forgotten/rejected at the cash tills that sit in the warm before they're returned to the chiller cabinets.

GinaG3 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Often I buy fresh chicken from Sainsburys get it > home and its off. If it's 'often' why do you keep buying chicken from there? ?30 is a lot of money to me. I'd be taking my custom elsewhere.

Very true Reg. Approx 20 years ago a woman was mugged just outside our flat. The policeman took her statement in our living room so I listened as they told her that there had been a spate of muggings of women walking home from the train station. It was thought that she'd probably been followed from the station until she was alone and somewhere quiet. Of course she didn't have a mobile phone then but she was carrying a very smart handbag which the policeman thought was why she was targeted. Had it not been for the policeman I wouldn't have known how common it was.

kford Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I could find plenty of examples of motorists in > London who didn't intend to break the law, but > found themselves ticketed by target-driven, > mostly-US companies acting on behalf of greedy > councils. If the 'greedy councils' got to spend the money on whatever they liked then I might have sympathy for the drivers that get caught. But as the money gets spent on things that would otherwise require an increase in my council tax then I'm all for taking money from those who park illegally to fund things for those who are law abiding. If you get fined when you haven't broken the law then fight like hell, but if you've broken the law, even inadvertently, you do just have to shrug your shoulders and remember to check the signs a bit more carefully next time. I don't get that cross when the parking attendants park illegally as long as it's in the course of doing their job. What does pi** me off is the police cars that stop on the double yellows by the banks (which is dangerous for pedestrians crossing, and drivers trying to see to get out onto LL) and then the occupants simply get out to use the cash machine.

karter Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don't think another supermarket on LL is needed > either but i do wish that co-op would keep good > stock levels up. Recently tried to buy fruits and > veggies and their stock level was incredibly low. > I hope the manager hears us. Sorry if someone has already mentioned this but I notice that Which? magazine has the results of its annual supermarket survey. 1st Waitrose, 2nd M&S. And who was last? Yes you've guessed it, the Co-Op. Earlier in this thread someone kindly posted a link to a complaints/ contact form for the Co-Op. If you want the manager to know your dissatisfaction about stock levels it's probably best to write to them rather than relying on the manager hearing about this thread.

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Eh? > > I'd have thought in a recession more people would > be looking to go to markets. > > Just, not expensive ones. I suppose the question here is whether or not markets have the ability to be cheaper than supermarkets/low cost high street retailers. In my youth we shopped in markets all the time but that was before the supermarkets went into battle against each other, and Primark and the other pile em high sell em cheap stores were still having their goods made in the UK/Ireland. If I see a market on my travels then I usually take a look but other than the odd bowl of mangos at a bargain price because there's a seasonal glut I rarely find myself noticing any significant financial advantage.

Keef Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This thread currently has 12448 Views. That is > quite a lot. You could send out 20000 leaflets, > but how many do you think would actually get read? I agree that a mailshot would be a waste of time/money but I'm sure that age statistics of users of this forum would make a classic bell curve with a peak of those in their 30s so, although vast by comparison, the views on this thread won't evidence the opinion of a cross section of ED. Somewhere early in this thread I think JB said he had a site in mind. Why not just stick a big poster on an Estate Agent style sign saying, "Do you want a Waitrose/M&S here? Please write to XXXX if you give a damn" (or similar). Word would soon get around amongst the non IT community. Even if the response rate was very low, it would be reasonable to assume that a cross section of ED society had had the opportunity to respond.

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- >> The actual area proposed for the extra stalls was > the north side of NCR outside the terraced houses > between Archdale Road and Lacon Road which have > miniscule front gardens. The market traders arrive > well before 7am and are very noisy setting up > their metal pole stalls. So residents would be > disturbed from 5 or 6 am onwards having been > disturbed by late night revellers. If this happened outside my window on a weekend morning I'm not sure that I would be able to maintain self control. No one should be subjected to it. The market is a great place for unnecessary shopping - it is expensive - so it's more for entertainment than need. I can't see why any additional market needs to set up before 9am at the earliest.