James Barber

Hi LondonMix, I would anticipate a new shop where the Gaden Centre is possibly a special case in people undertkaing shopping they'd do at London Bridge instead at such a new shop also possibly taking custom away form Sainsbury's on Dog Kennel Hill. A small shop unit next ot East Dulwich station is unlikely to be destination in its self. Whereas a much larger unit at 41-43 East Dulwich Road could become an alternative. The trouble is we don;t know who is behind this application. If it was a camera shop then that would be unique to the area and unlikely suck cash out of Lordship Lane. But if it were for arguments sake a Majestic it probably owuld decrease sales in Lordship Lane off-licences and potentially push one out of business. Lots of similar risks depending on what type of shop it starts as or could ever be. Shop unit classification is very broad. hi canp, Whoever is behind this planning application I would be opposed to the planning application. I'm not in love with M&S or Waitrose. I just don't want ot see lordship Lane how it was 15 years ago after Sainsbury's opened. Hi Cardiffgirl, Of course you can contact council officials to support this or any other planning application. Sadly few people ever bother to do this. If you live within 100m of the site and it goes to full planning committee you could also speak as a supporter for up to 3 mins to the committee and then answer questions about why you think a scheme is great fo the area. Agree that bringing units back into use is good for the area. But we have shop units on the NW corner of Lordship Lane with East dulwich Grove being used a offices. For the area it would make better sense for those offices to move to East Dulwich Road and the shop units turn bakc into shop units. This takes time. The alternative is we risk turning an office into shops, driving a lordship lane business/es out of business and then have empty shop units on Lordship Lane. My working assumption from local businesses is that many are only just surviving at the moment and a shock to their business would finish them.

Hi candp, How can I be predetermined for a decision I wont be called or expected to make? I've broken no code of conduct or nolan principles. If you think I have pleasedo report me to the councils monitoring officer. On this forum I'm one of the very few people who ARE accountable - every four years the first Thursday in May. As a local politican I've expressed a view in a forthright manner. If you think its a good idea to encourage and have new retail development of off but close to Lordship Lane then submit your support for the council planning officer. I think its a dangerous planning application risking the shopping vitality of Lordship Lane.

Hi LondonMix, The developer I believe is moving onto the site in the New Year once the current owners have fully retired. They then open the building late Spring/Summer 2014. New schools. Its agreed we have a shortage of places in our area Dulwich of 60-75 per year going foreward. Increasing by 2016 to 75-90 place per year. That the Nunhead area has a similar shortage. So my ward colleagues have proposed that a new school in built on the Dulwich Hospital site which would cater for 60-90 places. I know a German English group are talking to the DfES but I'm concerned they would have enough clout to ensure the Dept of Health doesnt just look for the maximum land sale when we need a proportion of this public land. I've spoken to the Harris Federation and they're interested. Tonight the Dulwich Community Council meeting 7pm onwards will include school places (8.30pm on the agenda) and tonight is meeting at James Allenys Girls School. Hi eastdulwichhenry, London is predicted to grow by 2m people over the next 10-15 years. National, London and local planning policies reflect this to some degree. When my children are adults I hope they have somewhere to live without the whole SE of england let alone East Dulwich being over developed.

Hi DJKQ, The local economy has a finite amount of cash. If people spend money in whatever new shop this could become that's less money to spend in shops on our high streets. The applicant has made a point to neither state the end shop or that they have not decided on an end shop. But whatever the shop do we want money taken away from our high streets which is full of businesses saying they're on a knife edge? Hi dbboy, Ditto above. If it's a chain stor then much less of every pound spent stays in the local economy so if anything it could result in overall less employment. Hi neilson99, I'm delighted you dont have a problem parking around the corner of Crystal Palace Road with East Dulwich Road. Other residents have complianed they do find it hard to park around there. Until I spotted this application it would have been decided by council officials who appear to have decided to consult with no one - not even the residenital home next door. If nothing else people have a chance to make clear they support a shop there or object to it. If it does go to committee if five people object and the council officials decide to accept the objections then a committee of councillors would decide and I wouldnt be on that committee as yes with the currently limited evidence I dont think it would be good for East Dulwich. Hi LondonMix, Out of town in that it's not on a regular high street or secondary shopping frontage. Out of town in that it risk sucking retail life out of our high street Lordship Lane and other secondary shopping frontages - the existing East Dulwich Road and Grove Vale. The Garden Centre shop being replaced by another shop. That the new shop might generate footfall for the new library and anchoring that end of Grove Vale hopefully hleping all the retailers their to experience more footfall. Hi toptotty, I'm not sure how I'm being immoral for highlighting a planning application that was going to be decided with no community awareness. I never sit on planning applications I have a preconceived view. So what's the problem? Hi edcam, Yes the current builidng is hideous and by all means contact the planning officer and tell them you support the planning application. But the application doesnt include any images of how it is propsed to look. So it could be a visual improvement or make it worse. Hi peckhamboy, That's useufl thank you. Until 12 months ago it was leased by Southwark Council and they were entertaining discussions according to a Village ward councillor of housing the East Dulwich Police station. But if Southwarkhas any interests of any kind it should be decided by planning committee to ensure transparency.

Well it looks like another such shop 20 metres from Crystal Palace Road could happen. As residents around there know parking is already a nightmare.

A planning application 12-AP-3604 has been submitted to turn the large ground floor of 41-43 East Dulwich Road from offices into a shop - probably another Tesco or Sainsbury's. The planning documentation is very sketchy - which smells fishy. And the neighbouring residential block hasnt been consulted. http://planningonline.southwark.gov.uk/AcolNetCGI.exe?ACTION=UNWRAP&RIPNAME=Root.PgeResultDetail&TheSystemkey=9547428 If you think a new shop away from our high streets should be stopped and/or that the parking is already a nightmare around the Dulwich Leisure Centre and this shop will make it much worse then please object by emialing council planning officer : [email protected] Please copy me into any email so I canhelp coordinate objectors. To me this is a landmark planning application about whether Lordship Lane is erroded away. What's very curious is that Southwark Council is the leaseholder (it used to be Dulwich Area Housing Office) so they must be party to this in some way. Edited to correct council officers email address - thanks to Cllr Dolezal for spotting that and letting me know.

Hi DJKQ, I've not seen evidence that blocking ends of residential roads creates more traffic on larger roads. Intuitively I would think that but equally lots of evidence that traffic evaporates to some degree when routes become longer. Have you seen a study into this? Hackney where they've done this hasnt reported extra traffic on larger roads. Hi DulwichFox, Most of Southwark is now 20mph zones or speed limits. But largely side roads that had few collissions to begin with. But I've not seen great numbers of people being prosecuted. Have you? Roads like the Lordship Lane (Goose Green to Wahtely Road where the main shopping drag is) should be 20mph.

Hi juicypips666, Some councils have chosen to close libraries to save money. Others have found wayst oreduce back office costs to avoid this and others have reduced library hours at some libraries and close other services (home library service * Mobile library) as Southwark have done. But the current Grove Vale Library annual rent is circa ?30,000. The new library will be on a ?100 pa Peppercorn rent with a 125 year lease - the developer will also pay for the libraries fit out. Good question what will happen with the current library site - the freeholder will try and rent it to someone. Hi LondonMix, The developer is St.Aidan's. Hi tiddles, This development did not initiate the CPZ consultation of last year. Planning officials have insisted on the developer putting aside monies for a CPZ despite repeated remonstrations from me that the money should be given over to something the community wants/needs - more books for the new library, Goose Green School. Michael Palaeologus, Waitrose would be exactly the type of shop the developer is likely to want. It's whether Waitrose have the capacity to add such a shop to its plans.

It will be replaced by: A new Grove Vale library - double the size of the current one. A shop unit. 20 flats. It should hopefully be completed Spring/Summer 2014. I had the library idea 2005. So it will have taken 9 years - banking crisis added 4 years and an awful lot of hard work y many different people and organisations.

Green Dale cycle and pedestrian path is partially blocked by a fallen tree.

Hi Medley, I think fundementally we disagree. ELL2 is great for a minority of people who live in Southwark. the Loss of the SLL will harm many more Southwark residents and local hospitals. Telling people to take a train to Clapham and change - but the people who will use ELL2 could have taken a train and changed but the ELL2 is constructed to avoid that. Southwark railway stations - apols for missing s. SLL would seem a great Overground route. But I've not heard any talk from Boris about reopening it later. I hope it is reopened but some people will have made live changing decisions about whether to move away from Camberwell or not by then. I think it risks Camberwell and Denmark Hill areas being denuded of people who can choose to move leaving a rump of people wealthy enough it makes no difference or those with no such choices. ie. they become less mixed communities. My point about viaducts is that some recompense for the harm they do to communities should occur and keeping basic rail services operating for those communities is a bare minimum for me. Swapping SLL for ELL2 is negative for Southwark.

Hi LondonMix, Sadly the London Bridge redeveoplement was approved even though it is at variance to the Southwark Plan - in essence the Southwark Plan says any planning permission would only be given if it improved rail services for Southwark railway stations - which it doesnt. The dislocation caused by viaducts etc is obvious. If you look at a map the streetscape is limited by the need to bridges or underpasses. Where we have such we see great incidences of crime. Classis example is that the riverside improvements don;t go further south than the railway viaducts - i.e. huge social and economic harm is caused tovarious Southwark communities. So to then have services removed...

Hi BicBasher, All Southwark Councillors of whatever political persuasion have campaigned to keep the SLL. The decision was made by the Tory Mayor of London and the Labour DoT SoS a number of years ago. Both blamed each other. Hi LondonMix, Closing SLL will release slots into Victoria and London Bridge. The former will be used for longer trains increaisng congestion at Victoria. In my mind the question is how do facilties such as railway lines splitting communities with viaducts and cutting compensate the communities they pass through causing dislocation and social and economic harm. Tradionally they've provided public service such as the SLL. in the US they pay local councils rates.

Hi Andybol, That sounds daft. If you email your precise address I'll ask officers to ensure the crew that covers your road shows a little more flexibility and initiative. NB. They have been berated for taking items next to wheelie bins away that werent out for rubbish collections. So that might have made them overly cautious.

And I was glad to suggest to you that proposed this motion.

Hi Chillaxed, Sadly those ulighters were installed with no view to how they'd be maintained and uplighters are talking to a local electrician often problematic mainteance wise. So we're getting all new LED up lighters. THey need slightly bigger holes etc. Here's the fun part - they're programmeable to give different lighting effects. So I've asked for something seasonal and Christmassy. God knows what the council ighting engineers will make with such an imprecise brief but whatever I'm sure it will be fun.

I agree with antantant. People move to areas based on hobs and transport links and what they can afford. They put down routes and plan for the long term. Once kids in nursery, schools its harder to move and many who used to move for secondary schools are now choosing not to - probably from house selling issues, etc. So buggering up the basis for many people living in the areas of Camberwell is shocking. Adding news services fine but not at the expense of closing existing services that were the basis for many people living in an area. It's bad for a community. For those that benefit. You were happy to move to an area with existing services. Great they're even better for you but have some compassion for people such as antantant who may have to move to accomodate their preexisting lives in our areas.

So UK plc reduce corporation tax, Germany then reduces it, UK plc then reduces it to compete, etc, etc. Effectively bigger businesses play one coutry of against another but the big business only exists because of the citizens of those countries.

But that's a zero sum game where countries keep lowering tax rates until comapnies pay no tax and the entire tax burden is placed on individuals - which effectively doesnt mean the rich who also avoid tax. No, peckhamboy what you suggest is not helpful but I do agree chancellors have sold UK plc down the river. Simple tax on turnover which would bring enough tax receipts to reduce employers National Insurance contributions - which is a tax on employing people.

I've had a subsequent letter dated Monday 12 November arrive yesterday about a drop in session on Monday 4-7pm 26 November at Goose Green School or call the project office 07809 530674.

Hi peckhamboy, The up lighters just outside East dulwich station should be working from 17 December. Three weeks of contractors making slightly bigger holes than currently there and wiring up the new up lighters. Hi Fazer71, If you email me I'll happily look into your case which sounds as though something has gone seriously amiss.

I had the misfortune to meet the Caffe Nero Finance Directo at the planning application appeal. During a break I personally found him one of the most arrogant and unpleasant people I've ever met. His view of the 'little people' ie. his customers and the sites neighbours was at best rudely dismissive. So I do not find it surprising they've chosen to find loopholes to avoid paying any corporation taxes. What is even more shameful is chancellors for decades have allowed this situation to develope where companies can choose to pay or not pay UK taxes. It is plainly immoral and unsustainable if we wish to have a thriving UK liberal economy - it's a zero sum game. If you find it offensive do boycott those organisations you feel are being immoral and place your business with UK registered companies that do pay tax. But do also write to your MP and newspapers. Unless they think people are really bothered it will quickly slip of off the national agenda.

Hi Strawbs, I also have found SELDOC being locally based really helpful with parental panics. My understanding is that they would be incorporated into proposals.

Hi peckhamboy, Apparently the cycle parking will open first week December.

NHS land. Which despite the Dulwich Hopsital being funded by local benefactors 120 years ag owould see al lthe capital receipts go into central NHS accounts.