first mate

James, In addition, do you know anything about the latest planning submission for the Iceland site?

James, Thank you. How many residents requested the brighter white lights, and were they all residents on the road in question? Is it possible to see the original submission- who was it sent to and when? I ask because having a bright white light shining into the bedroom is going to be pretty oppressive and may interfere with the sleep of some- the lights are more or less at bedroom window height, so perhaps this could also be taken into account before a final decision is made? It is the sort of issue that one would hope all the residents in the street would be asked about. It is great that the issue of paving is being addressed. Much of the existing paving is in good order, it just needs to be lifted, the substrate level adjusted and then relaid. The use of tarmac looks awful and this breaks up really quickly and does not work as a permanent solution. Simply relaying existing paving would be the best way of dealing with trip hazards.

James, do you know anything about the latest planning application for the Iceland site. As yet no info on Southwark Planning.

James Barber, do you know anything about this latest application?

No documents to view yet online. No mention of which store brand. No consultation with neighbours etc..

Unlurked, looked an cannot find this application. Can you post a link?

James, Can you tell us why Chesterfield has been earmarked in the budget for white street lighting and who has requested this? I had asked you earlier but you did not reply.

James, In regard to your budget list, could you give more detail about upgrading of street lights to white light on the road mentioned. Who has requested this and why?

uncleglen, wouldn't it just be easier to ask them to pick up? Don't know if you were in Peckham Rye yesterday morning but someone had dumped and strewn toilet paper and tissues all around and inside the Japanese summerhouse as well as into the stream. A fair bit was scrunched up so had possibly been used.

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > keeping a dog in the city is generally antisocial That's a bit OTT. Many would argue the opposite. As ever, the minority that don't pick up are a pain for the rest of us, including the dog owners, not forgetting it was a dog owner that started this thread.

Lane lover, Sue has already stated that she is very familiar with the noises foxes make through the seasons. She noted that the noises that alarmed her were different to the usual sounds foxes make- many of us have heard the blood curdling shrieks made by mating foxes and foxes fighting over territory. Sue was very clear that the noises that prompted this thread were different. I hope that the securing of the lost cat was the cause and that the noise has now stopped.

LD, I note in that last link that it is stated that Harris have 'exempt charity' status where they are not required to submit accounts to the Charity Commission- so who does have oversight? Must say that the article and comments from disgruntled staff makes rather worrying reading.

Back in November someone on the forum was contacted by one of the co-owners who promised to rectify problems and who blamed everything on the ex practice manager. Weeks down the line it seems as though his promises were empty words. What stood out for me was the co-owners comment that he owned many other GP surgeries, perhaps there is a clue there. I doubt that care is the primary consideration for the owners. Like Melbourne Grove surgery, it sounds like this surgery has fallen foul of the doctor turned big businessman. Each surgery has to be run carefully and of course the pennies have to be watched but there is a fine balance between proper care and running the business side. Where a doctor starts owning multiple practices I just cannot believe that patient care is still the primary concern. Everyone keeps mentioning the Gardens. I think I am right in saying that the partners do not own loads of other surgeries and that might be why they still offer the service one would expect from a community practice. The same problem is happening in care homes which, increasingly, are multiply owned by care moguls-are those guys truly interested in the care of their clients? Of course not- profit is what matters.

James, thank you.

James, can you help with the problem of junk mail and those that deliver it? On many occasions now I have arrived home to find the letter box stuck open with mail protruding. Aside from losing expensive heat from the house this is also like an invitation to any dodgy characters, advertising that the occupants are out. Any ideas how those who deliver unsolicited mail can be persuaded or even compelled to push it all the way through through the letter box?

Don't forget the Right to Light legilstion.Itmay or may not be relevant here, but if there is no pre-existing boundary structure of significant height then building one that is substantially higher and adding a further structure by way of a building/conservatory, may seriously impact on the light into your house. This is why you need to see plans which will show projected height of wall plus structure. There are legal firms that specilise in right to light, in your shoes I would be contacting one for some preliminary advice on what might count in your favour.

Seeing plans for any proposed works is important and even if it is being done under permitted development there will still be plans of some kind, even if they are only architect's plans. If you will undergo loss of light as a result of building then I would look at this very carefully indeed. Do involve Southwark planning, research the legal right to light angle and you also want to look at the planning portal http://www.planningportal.gov.uk this is the government's planning resource and outlines all the various rules and regs on permitted development, party wall agreements etc.. Most of all, don't sign or agree to anything until you are clear what your neighbours are doing, how that will impact on you, and where you stand in law. It helps to really read up on what is and isn't allowed nationally and to see what Southwark's stance on permitted development is,especially where terraces are involved.

Calsug, I think you may be overlooking the possibility that those against can simply be worn down over time by repeated applications that vary slightly each time. There are only so many times people can be galvanised to object, even if they really don't want a development. It is not so much M&S/the developer being dim, but them wanting something enough to try every possible angle to get it. Calsug Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > James Barber Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > > > Thankjs AbDabs. I agree with you all > development > > isnt automatically good as Calsug postulates. > > > > HelBel65 Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > No more of a postulation than your comments James, > but I suppose everyone in entitled to their > opinions - unless your comments are based on some > hard research instead of the consensus you have > obtained from the forum . I am intrigued as to why > you personally though are so anti the development > and if the council has actually given any > constructive feedback instead of blocking approval > every time M&S try - Surely they (M&S) are not dim > enough to keep on trying with plans that they know > you will reject.

James, yes, that old chesnut. Of course, one riposte goes if M&S snacks are so vital to one's quality of life why not choose to buy your house in an area that already has one? I guess the choice of location/you reap what you sow argument cuts both ways. Anyway, it was not a single factor decision and the lesser known point re boundaries and land ownership, is one that would probably have made the scale of the application unlikely to succeed, whatever the planning decisions.

I don't think anyone has said there is a right to park a car in front of your house- the point was being able to park on the street you live or in another street close by, more regularly than not- not the same thing at all.

It's balancing the needs of a smaller group of residents to get a decent night's sleep and to be able to park their car on or close to their street against a larger group of individuals' rights to buy tasty snacks and ready-made meals. It's tricky.

It wasn't just parking, it was also the issue of early morning deliveries every day of the week and the noise and disturbance this would generate. There are also boundary and land ownership issues which are known about, although these points are only addressed obliquely in the statement. For those that live in the immediate area it was quite clear that there was an attempt to stuff too much into the available space.

Jeremy and Landy, Fair points both, and with the hours that many have to work I understand. I really do hope that my fear that more chains moving in will spell the end of the current ED is totally misplaced. I will miss the garden centre though, what with that and plant nation closing we don't have anything similar. The only new shops opening seem to be cafes and supermarkets.

Jeremy aside from convenience in terms of having to walk a few hundred yards less to shop when stepping off the train, do we really need another supermarket-type store? As others have said we have Sainsbury's at either end of ED, we have the co-op, Tesco Express, Iceland/ M&S. I fear that the more chains that move in the more likely the small independents will fold and close and ED that we know and love will be lost. On another note, wasn't James Barber very against another local supermarket (Co-op) getting a late alcohol licence?

The owner has rexcently lost her husband, so the owner will be grieving as well as the dog. Getting a new dog will not help since the dog was bonded to the husband who has died. Dogs can develop separation anxiety after a sudden change in cricumstance- the disappearence of a beloved owner together with stressful events leading up to and during an illness and the subsequent grief of the owner and dog left behind amount to something like trauma for the dog. It cannot understand what has happened only that its world has turned upside down. The barking may be the dog trying to contact its male owner or simply a way to relieve massive stress and anxiety. I hope that now there is greater understanding of circumstances that people on the forum can manage to give a little more leeway to the lady for now. Frnakly there is many a time I have wnated to tell neighbours conducting building work- that has gone on for ever- to pack up and stop, but circumstances have made it necessary for them to build, so one learns to accept the noise. If the lady in question would like some advice please ask her to private message me.