first mate

Can I just point out that while aesthetics are important there is also the vital issue of light. Terraces are built close to each other anyhow. Building up can seriously blot the light into your neighbour's home as well as significant parts of their garden. Aside from wanting more space many loft conversions are built to maximise light for the owner. All of us wnat as much light and space as possible. It seems very unfair that in adding light to your own property you take it from your neighbour...after they have endured months of messy and noisy building work too. If you want more space move to a larger property.

*Bob* How did you guess :)

I for one would wholly support Southwark in trying to keep a handle on the proliferation of L shaped loft conversions that have been cropping up on terrace houses. For one, they really affect the light of the neighbouring property and most look horrendous too. Some of these loft conversion companies are also very happy to play fast and loose with planning law. Perhaps they have just got away with it thus far and now, thank goodness, planning departments are beginning to crack down. Loft conversions are lovely for the people that own them but pretty awful for the people who live next door.

evildrwallace, an excellent point, well made.

NO! I don't know what your views are on this James but I'd be interested to know? Like others here I don't believe we need another supermarket, it can only damage our wonderful indie shops. We don't want to have an anchor store that attracts other big chains to the area. The beauty of ED is that it has so many indie shops and therefore feels a bit different. We're lucky enough to have butchers, cheese shops, bakers, a fishmonger, delis and greengrocers. The livelihood of all of these might be threatened by another big supermarket. Please don't let ED be destroyed by offering it up for sale to the chains. What do you think James? Do you support the idea of another supermarket?

Well, we could introduce laws of collective responsibility in all sorts of areas- anyone that consumes takeaway food or drinks out of glasses/bottles near a public area should, by law, have to, pick up any litter they see: discarded gum, chicken bones, half eaten sarnies, smashed glass of any kind, ciggie butts................should fix any littering problem, I agree :)

PP/Pebble, thanks for reply. Any way of getting this sort of thing in London shop? I'd meant to get something but caught out by early snow. I also wondered how easy these things are to clip on and off?

Louisiana, I think that's what might be putting others off. I also thought- what's the point it'll all get snowed over again, but I think, if done daily, it does help a bit. It doesn't take long, as we know.

Jamma, That was my thinking, but judging the results in my street I am the only one that thinks it worth doing. There are plenty of people around and most of them young and able bodied. As you say, only 10 minutes work. If done daily it would make getting about for the elderly etc.. a little easier. Has anyone tried clip on snow cleats or chains for their shoes- do they work?

Just out of interest, has anyone used a shovel to clear the snow from part of the path outside where they live? Do people think it is s good idea?

Gina, I cannot think why the would not tell you. Give it a go.

Gina, Any news? Well done to you for trying to help in difficult circumstances. Let us hope the poor dog is found.

Gina, If you think the dog will run into the traffic or try to cross the road then I would call the police- justified because it's rush hour and dog could cause a serious accident at what is already a traffic blackspot.

Gina3, Stating the obvious I know but see if you can get the dog to come to you. Get quite close and then bob down. Don't look at it just be calm and call it softly. If it's lost it'll be in a blind panic. Sometimes a dog will go to a person that seems calm and trustworthy. The local RSPCA is on 07952 680522- they might be able to give some practical advice. Good luck.

Tracy Dickinson, Thank you for addressing some of the concerns on the forum. I welcome the fact that you have amended the survey to clarify what constitutes a children's play area. I suppose my fear, shared by others, is that this clause of the proposed Southwark DCO's can be used in future to deny access to areas of parks that are currently open to dog owners. For instance, there are areas on Peckham Rye that are fenced off (The American and Japanese gardens) but that are currently used by children and by dog owners. Might these be designated children's play areas in future? We are also aware of the desirability of some local parks as areas that schools can use for sports, presumably such areas would be even more desirable if dogs were banned from large sections- you'd only have to put up a fence. Can Southwark give some reassurance that this is not on the cards? Most sensible people would not allow their dogs to run amok in an area that is fenced off for use by children, particularly if children are present and so it is a minority of "offenders" we are referring to. Ditto, irresponsible ownership of dangerous dogs is just one example of a serious of anti social behaviours that go hand in hand. Greater detail on how Southwark plans to effectively deal with offenders would be helpful. For instance, I have witnessed various types of anti social behaviour in local parks (not all involving dogs) and on only one occasion could I find a warden to report this to, despite attempts to find one on every occasion. Dangerous Dogs are a discrete area of criminality that has complex roots and mixing it up with general dog ownership is not that helpful. I would welcome moves to enforce people to keep their dogs on lead on public streets at all times, I would also welcome moves to enforce people to pick up after their dogs. However, without the necessary manpower it is hard to see how this can be achieved. I fear that the DCO's will be toothless in practice and that the only thing you will really be empowered to do is perhaps to limit the freedoms of decent dog owners in our parks at some point in the future.

Golly TQ, if that's your idea of a "menace", I'd love to have your life.

Hmmm, and you have to conclude that Southwark would be aware of the failure of the scheme in Islington, so what is the survey all about? If enough people give a negative response to dogs in children's areas and being offlead generally, and they will because the of way the questions have been designed,then the one thing Southwark would be able to do is to start to ban dogs from parks or parts of the parks. The target would be the decent dog owner (easy target). Those who dislike dogs would be happy so Southwark could claim success, it would also open up parks for "other" uses.

DJKQ, Indeed. I'd be far more worried about my youngster being contaminated by rat urine- now that really is a potential killer. We are all only 12 feet away from any rat population in the city- the burgeoning ratty- populace next to DKH Sainbos is just one example.

computedshorty, A point well made. Of course most dogs, owned by good citizens, are microchipped and hence both dog and owner are readily identified by a portable scanner. Natch, the antisocial type probably doesn't microchip, in the same way they may not pay car insurance or they may drive without a licence- of course these are just the types that wardens etc.. are not going to pull over and extract fines from- and we keep going round and round. Sorry, edited to say that I did not want to imply the homeless are bad citizens. One of the GOOD things Southwark has been doing is offering free microchipping- quite how a homeless person would be identified in that instance I don't know name and place and DOB I guess??

Rock N Roll Paddy, So will you be applying your zero tolerance approach to other, arguably more serious, types of anti social behaviour? The yawnsome refrain is bang on- owners are the problem, I'm sure even you can figure out that a dog cannot pick up and bag its own poo.

Yup, My feeling is that Southwark are quite knowingly tapping into the extreme anti dog prejudice out there. There are all kinds of negative experiences that we could use as the basis to fly into a rage and ban things left right and centre- guess that's just the irrational side of human nature. The real question is will these sort of dog control orders achieve what they set out to do and I have to say it's unlikely and I really don't believe Southwark think it will either. It's just kneejerk stuff pandering to tabloid sentiments. The threat of fines and jail have hardly stopped boy racers, drink driving or wilful speeding (see Barry Road thread). Finally Southwark say that they are working closely with Battersea and the RSPCA on dog control orders, I'd be keen to know the views of those organisations on how the proposed system will work in practice and how they would interpret the Southwark survey.

DJKQ I agree with you about the practicalities of extracting money from ne'er do wells- it just ain't going to work. Southwark know it I'm sure, and this makes me wonder what the real agenda behind this survey is.

Rock N Roll Paddy, On the spot fines for not picking up after dog fouling we can all agree on. They could also have stated that on the spot fines would be issued for dogs off lead on streets, paths, around council estates etc..Most people would not have a problem with that either. The way it reads at the moment makes the definition of children's play areas a moveable feast that could be applied to large sections of the parks etc.. That is not reasonable. Of course most people will say dogs should not be allowed into children's play areas, but without defining what those are the whole exercise could mean dog owners will be banned from large sections of the park in future. There needs to be clarity on this. The fact remains that the vast majority of the dog owning public will continue to behave well and the thugs will just carry on. In all my time walking the parks I've seen the odd dodgy type with a dodgy dog up to no good, but there's never been a warden in sight. How will that change? Who will issue these fines? I don't buy it.

It's a pretty poorly designed survey. Aside from the bit on dog fouling it all seems rather vague- what is a children's play area exactly, is it an area that has been sectioned off specifically for children or any area where children play? If the latter that could be any open space at any time. What about all the kids that play footie in the park at weekends, does that mean dogs will be banned from those areas? We already know that certain local politicos would like to see greater use of Peckham Rye by schools- making it a children's playing area and therefore subject to dog control orders and a ban......maybe?? The survey seems designed to get the most anti dog resposne possible and so could give Southwark the power to ban dogs from all kinds of areas. I know this would have some forumites jumping for joy but I would urge the responsible dog owning public to get onto this one now before it is too late.

Definitely get checked by GP. Mini strokes can cause a variety of temporary neurological problems.