James Barber

It is ironic that councillor James McAsh, a self avowed life long marxist who literally has written about wanting to overthrow capitalism, complains that there isn't enough money for councils. Austerity for councils started in the early days of the Blair government with central grants to councils ot rising with inflation.

Holding noisy disruptive events in the middle of the public examinations period - GCSE's and A Levels - is not helpful for local children who will likely be stressed already.

Hi JenJenJen, Southwark Council have targets for turning around "minor voids" which are council properties with minimal work to be able to re-let them to new tenants. As it is consistently missing these targets and taking 3 x times longer than the target, that past councils did meet, they have just relaxed the targets to the level they are currently achieving. Clearly these empty homes are empty much longer than I suspect you, and definitely I, and the new tenants, would like. Big fan of More or Less. But their reporting is at a country wide level for empty homes not down to individual councils.

This scheme seems fundamentally flawed and likely to lead to crash concentration and worse crash outcomes. If Peckham Rye east is closed to motor vehicles, and the various side road closures, then a lot of extra traffic will be forced onto Peckham Rye west which will slow down the bus routes and cyclists following that route to and from East Dulwich. It is also likely to raise the pressure for motor vehicle drivers at the western Peckham Rye / East Dulwich Road junction. A young girl died at this junction in the past while temporary lights were in place. Stressed motorists are a greater danger and risk for more serious crashes. Looking at Crashmap.co.uk for the area the western junction vs the eastern one, for the last five years public data is available for, shows 8 vs 7 Slight crashes and 1 vs. 0 for Serious crashes on these two junctions. Placing further traffic onto the western junction would likely exacerbate this. BUT if the whole western Peckham rye from East Dulwich Road to Scylla Road junction is compared to the eastern side it becomes 2 serious and 17 slight on the west side vs. 0 serious and 11 slight crashes on the east side. I can’t see how the scheme would make this better. But intuitively it would seem a real risk to make it much worse.

Good update - thanks march46. The actual % Southwark Council is currently agreeing with developers that must be social housing is generally much lower - not walking the talk. And the council currently has over 1,250 empty council properties and rising, plus over 5,000 empty private properties.

Bit nerdy. But the traditional form of England/Wales local government was based on committees with themehmbers in proportion to the respective political parties numbers. Blair government introduced for councils that chose it cabinet structure where the majority hold roles covering each of former committee would decide/confirm. Additionally a Blair option for a super council leader Mayoral role such as Lewisham rather than ceremonial mayoral role who chairs council Council Assemblies of all councils. A number of councils have since moved from exec Mayoral role to cabinet basis. Without Councillors being elected via a Proportional Voting system I personally would prefer to see a return to committee decision making structure. It ensures all Councillors have to know what they're doing rather than the ruling party leaving it to a few cabinet members and the rest just voting at Council Assemblies how they/re told. Just a personal view.

Current status of Planning Application 24/AP/2314 is the approval document was published 31 December 2025 with effect 1 January 2026. https://planning.southwark.gov.uk/online-applications/files/E5F5EC6005598720843BC00D7E6A7D11/pdf/24_AP_2314-DECISION_NOTICE_-_MAJOR_-_GRANT-4194604.pdf It has 41 conditions many of which must be confirmed via further applications into Southwark Council before works on site can begin. I've not seen any applications to start discharging those conditions yet - amazed some of these have not been prepared by the developer. No work of any kind is allowed on site until some of those conditions are discharged. Additionally the sites proximity to the rail tracks means Network Rail will have to be heavily involved. My work experiences with Network Rail would suggest quite some delay will come rom them alone. With the national government and Southwark Council planning to reduce the proportion of social housing from 35% to 20%, and some schemes in Southwark are now only provided 2% social housing. It would be amazing if the developer doesn't seek an amended viability appraisal to reduce social housing for the scheme or even taller buildings.

Wont that move the traffic to Dunstans Grove? And further magnify the Dunstans Road traffic with banned left turn traffic, right turning traffic out of Cornflower and Balchier and then doing 3 point turns?

HI CPR Dave, I have to agree with Dogkennelhillbilly. We still have net migration into the country as per the Office of National Statistics- https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/internationalmigration It may go negative in a year or two if pundits specialising in this are correct, but it isn't yet. Hi Dogkennelhillbilly, I don't think your maths is correct. Southwark Council states total empty homes at 8,588 -https://southwarknews.co.uk/news/housing/southwark-has-over-8500-empty-homes/ the total number of homes is 135k. Which means 6.36% are empty. However, while canvassing came across an empty home which does not appear to have been appreciated by Southwark Council who are now investigating whether the empty Home Council Tax Premium should have been applied for the last 10+ years. It seems likely the 8,588 is under reporting the number of empty homes. Infill sites are defined by most public bodies was non strategic sites from a development perspective. The railway yard and other sites are in the Southwark strategic plans and thus would not be infill sites. Tall buildings planted into lower surrounding suburban areas is a subjective matter whether they are viewed as out of character for the area. It is factually true that I think they are out of character. Equally you have no qualms about such tall buildings being planted into the SE22 area.

Please do keep pavements clear for pushchairs, etc, when leaving trees outside.

Hi DuncanW, Price is a function of supply and demand where demand is a function of the taxation or properties, price and availability of finance for all the different type of buyers both domestic and foreign individual and business and corporate. Much foreign buying also have some cultural issues around not buying or even using second hand homes so they remain empty - see lack of lights on riverside proprieties in London. Hi beansprout, Finland solution, admittedly a much smaller country, that housing the homeless is significantly cheaper than not housing them in terms of health, social ,etc costs. Southwark has the joint highest number of empty council homes, and second worst total number of empty homes a smidgen behind Barnet Council in London - https://www.selondoner.co.uk/news/16052025-southwark-council-sees-most-empty-homes-owned-as-long-term-vacants-increase-again . We do have infill sites in the area. Infiill sites are small parcels of land. The Railway site isn't an infill site, it's too big. It is a raised area by roughly two storeys compared to the area where a 9 storey tower and other 7 & 8 storey blocks will be built on top. This is totally out of character for the area. Many residents will be directly impacted. Other developers on the night told me after the Panning Committee approval that they were shocked it had been approved. It has changed their attitudes of what can be approved in the area. Dulwich Hamlet ground has very recently been approved to be moved to Metropolitan Open Land green open space to allow the current ground to be rebuilt into from memory 248 flats. It seems clear Labour councils have been directed by the Labour Government to 'approve baby approve'. Southwark Council and the Labour Government are planning the reduction in the proportion of Social Housing in new housing developments from 35% to 20%. This likely to delay a number of approved schemes while they recycle through the planning process to reduce their social housing numbers. WRT student numbers. The peak is forecast in 2030 with rapid decline thereafter. International students numbers already declining. What will happen to these blocks of small studio rooms in the longer term once student numbers are down? Students likely to choose more centrally located blocks. Current student accommodation such as Champion Hill has been closed for a number of years with no rush to reopen it so King's doesn't appear to feel pressure on the student accommodation front.

Yes, that exception on top of the station was made. But it wasn't 9. That single story paid for a doubling in the size of Grove Vale Library.

Hi Dogkennelhillbilly, North of East dulwich station is not covered by the Dulwich Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) Suburban requirements. And 1978 was before this guidance was agreed. Hi Jenijenjen, We have vacant sites and sites that for certain heights would likely become available. Giibs & Dandy vacant builders yard - neighbours I've spoken to of this site are extremely concerned about what the council may now approve. Kwik Fit, Goose Green Trading Estate instantly come to mind as sites where tall buildings would bring a significant offer to the freeholders to see the sites up. The Southwark Plan treats Giibs & Dandy + Kwik Fit as one site suitable for residential redevelopment. It also lists the Trading Estate for this as well. See page.84 https://www.southwark.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2024-09/Southwark Plan 2022 reduced 1.pdf Do you think developers having seen the council approve a 9 storey redevelopment are more or less likely now to seek the same at other East Duwlcih locations?

Hi Dogkennelhillbilly, You won't be aware that i proposed infill sites for housing in East Dulwich - the garages on Bassano Street and Henslowe that respectively became 1-4 Dill Terrace family houses and the 78, 80, 80A Henslowe Street family houses. These were council owned garages and it was frustrating how slow the council was to go from my idea to completion (roughly eight years). East Dulwich has some other vacant WW2 bomb sites I'm guessing that the private land owners have been sitting on.Owe for a land tax for vacant land. WRT to the builders yard by East dulwich station. Southwark Council has an agreed policy the area should remain suburban 2/3 storeys maximum. But the approved scheme is 9 storeys of student accommodation. Very hard to put this genie back in the bottle. The council has recently publicly stated lower ratios of social housing will be required. I will be amazed if the developer doesn't submit another application now they have the 9 storeys approved but with significantly less social housing. The less social housing the higher the land values. The higher the land values the less social housing viability reports state are possible. If we really want to increase home supply - Southwark have over 6,000 empty homes. Vancouver charges a low % of the value of empty homes and rapidly eased this problem. Parts of Wales have introduced under Article 4 planning permission is required for second homes seeing within 12 months a dramatic decrease in property prices. Southwark Council have Article 4 requirements - why not add this one? It takes National political will to solve this AND regional and local authorities such as the second home council tax premium and these being used promptly.

I know I'm a bit premature but don't want to forget through too much Chrisntas cheer! Southwark Council Christmas trees recycling arrangements 2025 - bit worrying for the future that they're emphasising the free bit. "We’ll collect and recycle your real Christmas tree for free! Trees should not be taller than 5ft. You should chop any taller trees into smaller pieces. Remove all decorations and the pot or stand and recycle it by: putting your tree with your garden waste containers on collection day requesting a free collection if you do not have a garden waste collection taking it to our Reuse and Recycling Centre [43 Devon Street, SE15 1AL open 08:30-16:30 Mon-Sun] If you live in a flat you must leave the tree: outside on the kerb visible for the collection crew not in a bin store" I'll add the link to the collection booking service when it opens on 22 December.

Most homes in East Dulwich / Good Green ward have collections on Tuesdays or Wednesdays. So no changes for them this year. But for those few local homes with collections normally on Thursdays or Friday, with Christmas, Boxing day happening on Thursday and Friday any blue, brown or green bin collections will be delayed by two days. So Thursday 25 December collections will be on Saturday 27 December and Friday 26 December collections on Sunday 28 December. For New Years day those Thursday collections will be on the Friday 2 January and those with normal collections of Fridays that will be on Saturday 3 January. To double check when your Southwark Council rubbish, recycling, food waste, garden waste collections will be taking place please please check here - https://services.southwark.gov.uk/bins/lookup

The planned closure of Dulwich Library for over 6 months to refurb and change the heating seems odd. The description of works does not seems to align with the expected length of closure. Some library authorities use shop fitters over December/January when they have no other work to undertake such library refurbs. The costs are especially keen as a result. And shop fitters are used to compressed time works. Win win. I would hope the works involve using the vacant unused second floor. Perhaps relocating the first floor librarian back offices there to make a bigger user space on the first floor.

The proposed BT freestanding advertising/street hub unit is proposed to be placed immediately adjacent a Bus Stop area. It will impede people entering and leaving buses that stop at this bus stop. It would block buses deploying their disabled ramps. Frankly, I am amazed this wasn’t caught at the application initial assessment and rejected. This proposal will cause problems, it is clearly discriminatory towards disabled people and people requiring wheelchairs. Equally it would block people with prams from accessing buses that stop at this bus stop. I would encourage people to email the case officer pointing out the blindingly obvious - [email protected]

I really enjoyed the last one but sadly I can't make it Sue - hope it goes well.

Thanks Sue for organising. What an interesting bunch of people to meet up with.

Such developments typically have 6-18months resolving all the conditions imposed on the approve scheme. While this going on they'll be lining up the constructions contractors, project management, etc. I'd guess 12-18months time.

Very good point Sue. If a replacement franchise is successfully let then it would throw into question whether the Crown Post Office was unprofitable. The only obvious differential would be levels of pay for the staff and level od service for customers and any up tick in usage.

The Post Office is a still owned by the government. The decisions about whether to keep the Crown Post Office open or replaced with a downgraded version on Lordship Lane is a Labour Government decision.

A franchise Post Office is in fact a sub Post Office. It isn't able to provide the same services as the current Crown Post Office on Lordship Lane. Things like Road Tax, Passports, etc are not allowed via sub Post Offices. Likely the staff wont be transferred across as their hourly rate would decrease. It may be the hours of operating will increase. Crown Post Office staff are often unionised, sub Post Office staff are not usually unionised. Franchise sub Post Office commission for completing the various services is lower than for Crown Post Offices.

The developer is now onward selling the scheme to realise their profits. A developer contact tells me this happens when they can't believe their luck at getting planning permission and the promises they've had to make to a council to get their way. Any purchaser is likely to try and realise more profits by seeking changes to the approved scheme.