James Barber

Back to this thread. All three East Dulwich ward councillors attended the planning committee tonight. We spoke against the planning application. The committee voted, and this has become a regular pattern, Labour councillors the majority for the application accepting it was 50% over the suburban densities for the area. The two Lib Dem councillors voted against stating they agreed it was an over development. Currently it feels like a free for all for taller denser buildings in Southwark. I've not seen an application refused on these grounds for several years now. Planning committee aren't whipped - they are quasi judicial - but if you attend enough planning committees they give this aura. Schemes are being granted permission that exceed our policies and strategies. Before such decision making was removed by the Labour administration it would have been decided by local councillors in Dulwich. My experience of local Dulwich councillors deciding such schemes was they knew the area better. That the M&S applications would not have been granted permission. Which means the officers would have more ability to get better schemes presented than this one approved tonight. One small request I made was accepted - adding a condition for s Construction Management Plan in the hope this will eliminate the outlandish developer habit of ignoring hours of work on the site. Assuming this works it will be a little more considerate for nearby residents and less officer time enforcing the rules. One bizarre point was a resident objecting to the scheme quoting word for word the H&S Executive guidelines about delivery lorries and bandsmen. Then the Southwark transport officer stating Southwark policy which completely ignored the H&SE Exec guidelines.

Hi immyp, I'd have thought you do need planning permission. But if you email me I;ll get a definitive answer from the council planning department for you.

I'm puzzled tommy2. I'm unclear why illegal driving should be enforced? The no entry is to reduce rat running. if you live on that street and would like it removed as a restriction then happy to help you consult with your neighbours about this.

Marks and Sparks have also made a licensing application. they wish to sell alcohol 6am-midnight 7 days a week. BUT the site only has planing permission to operate as a shop Mon-Sat 7am-10pm & 10am-6pm Sundays and Bank holidays. You can see the application here - http://app.southwark.gov.uk/licensing/LicPremisesAppliedDetails.asp?systemkey=851512 You can tell council licensing officers by 31 March 2016 whether you support or oppose such opening hours via [email protected] and please copy me so I can see how things are going.

Hi rupert james, Bit unfair on the other two councillor.s I know Cllr Rosie Shimell plans to be present but will also be covering the Standards Committee as well. Rosie covers face to face surgeries and I cover the East Dulwich Forum. Im also much more of a propeller head about planning. Hi Robin, Thanks for the Cil suggestion.

Hi uncleglen, Yes, people do have to apply for disabled parking bays. It isn't a quick process. Currently local councillors via the Dulwich Community Council are consulted. This is now proposed to be removed and a councillor from outside the area will decide from Tooley Street, SE1. Hi Coolbananas, KK, People can seek to place such portaloos on the public highway. But usually this is because they have no space on site. This is a massive site with existing toilets and no residents So I would expect them to properly project plan the site so they don't need portaloos. I'll ask officers what we can do to ensure they minimise the chaos local residents have been experiencing - late illegal building works have unsurprisingly left a bad taste in many mouths.

Hi first mate, After some serious reorganising of family diary I'll be at the planning committee speaking as a ward councillor against this planning application.

I've checked and they're still on track to complete on time. Very exciting after all the hard work Cllr Rosie Shimell and I have put in and former councillor Jonathan Mitchell and of course the 250+ families who lent their support.

If it s stinks that badly then it would be a public nuisance and Southwark Council I would expect ot take enforcement action. Email the details to [email protected] and cc me so I can chase it up for you.

Hi Steve, About a month ago I knocked on immediate neighbours of the new primary school site asking about any such problems and was delighted at how positive those immediate neighbours were with how things progressing and how responsive the building contractors have been. I hasten to add one had had issues arise but the description of how they were dealt with was very reassuring. So please feel free to email me any issues to see if I can help resolve them.

Hi katanita, The animal mutilation and cat murders sound horrific. I hope the Police catch whoever is doing this ASAP. The best thing I can suggest is if it happens to someone pets or someone comes across such a dead cat to call the Police 101 non emergency number. The more reported crimes the greater the chance the Police will be able figure a pattern and catch the perpetrators. IF anyone see's something suspicious call 999. Police regularly tell me they'd wish someone had called 999 as they may have been able to respond and catch someone. Join or create a Neighbourhood Watch for your street. Working with neighbours means you're more likely to recognise suspicious behaviour. oThe other thing is to ensure everyone has chipped cats so if they don't have a collar - our cats are like Houdini at removing theirs - the RSPCA/Police can trace owners. Sorry I can't come up with anything more than this.

I'm not clear of the link between the ?8m+ annual subsidy from the Dulwich Estate commercial activities of the three big local private schools. 86% of the Dulwich Estates profits going to those three private schools. The schools have very different levels and numbers of bursaries. Most of the bursaries are 10-15% discounts on the fees. The fees have been increasing YoY by 5%. Also as a proportion of places - the schools have been expanding numbers of pupils over recent years - the bursary places may actually be proportionally lower than they used to be. Don't have time to analyse this. The schools via the coach services are increasingly becoming sub regional schools - making the serving of families from Greenwich to Fulham - rather than local private schools possible.

Changes seem good to me. One-way gyratory systems usually lead to speeding and community dislocation - residents opposite sides of roads know each other less. Walking kids through there isn't great fun and the changes I'm hopeful will make it more pleasant. I did submit feedback that the loss of parking places seemed excessive and that they should try keeping more or moving them. The final report doesn't talk about a net maintenance or increase in parking spaces for residents which I think could have been achieved easily. The decision will be taken at the next Nunhead & Peckham Community Council on 21 March. If your for or against these changes you could present any petition at the committee or make comments and ask questions about this scheme there. Councillors can, and at the Dulwich CC often are, by such representations. Comments on this thread are unlikely to change the outcome. Get involved.

What went before Sea Cow in this unit?

Dulwich HIlls historically I understand was the area around Sunray Avenue/Red Post Hill. Not ideal to make new names up contrary to local history. Not sure why came up with the name. So rather than Dulwich Hills ward perhaps East Dulwich Hills ward a new name would work. I don't think in our multicultural world naming wards after pubs or places of worship inclusive.

I will be suggesting that East Dulwich ward remain with the name East Dulwich ward as it forms the bulk of the East Dulwich area. Seems odd changes to boundaries but keeping the heart of East Dulwich called East Dulwich to me is preferable than creating a new name few will associate with. Dulwich Hills historically was the area around Sunray Avenue. I will propose that the name East Dulwich Hills be used. Not sure why those new odd names suggested.

The Boundary Commission has issued its draft proposals for changing ward boundaries https://www.lgbce.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/27625/Southwark-draft-recommendations-2016-02-09.pdf Maps of the proposals here: https://www.lgbce.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/27628/Southwark_D_Sht1_SO.pdf For East Dulwich the name is changed to Goose Green shifted north, extended west and broadly stops at Barry Road and SE are moved to new Dulwich Hills ward. Largely as Labour proposed. Not clear why East Dulwich name is such a problem. New ward Half Moon ward proposed the area of Southwark closest to Herne Hill. This is as I proposed and hopefully would give that area the focus it hasn't had over the years. College ward is shrunk shedding some to the new Dulwich Hills and changing names to Dulwich Woods. Village Ward become Dulwich Village. Do take a look and feed back to the boundary people what you think via [email protected] And view all the info - https://www.lgbce.org.uk/current-reviews/greater-london/southwark I have to be honest I do feel a strong emotional affinity to representing East Dulwich.

Hi Rosetta, Sadly I've not been able to find out yet. Sorry ti;s taken so long. Will try again. Thanks ITATM for helping while I've been focusing on a fab new day job.

I'll be mentioning this consultation in SE22 next month as a starter. I'm also expecting letters to the area to encourage responses. Hi BNG, In the past I created a thread for every consultation I came across affecting ED but was discouraged by Admin from continuing this. It could swamp the forum. One thread could get really jumbled. People can register with Southwark council and then any consultation affecting East Dulwich from Southwark Council they should get an email prod from the council to take part. Hi richard tudor, I've been a little quieter than usual as recently started a fab new day job. Hi ED_moots, The consultation survey will have clear cut numbers and hopefully lots of comments as well. I really don;t think, assuming raw data without names, will result in some biased report. But I;d welcome everyone to check it out when produced. If it does then clearly I;d be seeking a refund of their fees.

Dropped kerbs need planning permission. The planning permission process involves posting a notice on lampposts only these days - letters to neighbours by planning officers generally no longer happen. Neighbours can object to planning applications. You can check via the Southark Council website if planning permission has been applied for. They also need a Traffic Management Order - these are decided at your community council by local councillors. Again you can object to these. At the last Dulwich Community Council we had a proposal for 3 new dropped kerbs for front garden parking (3 different homes). Due to the current administrations rules about double yellow lines it would have meant the removal of 12 parking spaces on Lordship Lane so we felt compelled to reject the proposals. It sounds like this neighbour has jumped the gun and planning enforcement could be called.

They need to install more ticket machines before any such closures as an absolute minimum. 1 machine at Denmark hill is mad. Two at East Dulwich station wont b enough as the time to fix them is too long.

Hi rich, I suspect SE21 appears high as people are reporting burglaries as a pre requisite for insurance claims. Hi Mick Mac, You think something happening once every 82 years makes it a hotspot? Don't get me wrong we need to decrease crime. But the stats given are meaningless as they require self selection and the website giving the stats is taking a very partial view.

It looks like 61 burglaries per 1000 homes over the last 5 years reported for SE21 pot code. So a 1.22% chance of being burgled each year living in SE21 or once every 82 years. Is that really a burglary hotspot? Clearly the stats are meaningless. It's reported burglaries for insurance purposes. Is it on a price comparison website.

Hi first mate, I welcome the idea of an anchor store provider to East Dulwich such as M&S. But I don't welcome M&S extending the current Iceland store or reducing choice by replacing Iceland or the over development of the site. Hence my numerous objections to their planning applications. I believe you understand my position so I'm baffled why you present it differently on this thread. Hi ITATM, Planning Enforcement has been scaled back by the current administration. When Lib Dems started leading the council in 2002 we found Planning Enforcement was a contractor 3 hours per week. Barely able to keep up with the paperwork let alone undertake any investigations. It appears the current administration is heading back to those bad old days. I'll try and find exactly what resources they currently and will have going forward.

hi derwentgrove, I've reported it. If it isn't cleared within 48 hours please prod me to chase. For future occurrences you can email [email protected] and copy me at [email protected] Hi first mate, I haven't forgotten you but running late with other more pressing casework.