intexasatthe moment

I imagine point 3 is covered by 6.6 PROHIBITION OF WAITING AT ANY TIME 6.6 signs are no longer prescribed for a prohibition of waiting that is in force for 24 hours a day, every day of the year. This restriction is now imposed solely by the road markings. but I could be wrong . Sure we have plenty of time to figure it out .

James - back to double yellow lines across new dropped kerbs and extending 2 metres either side . I know on Oct 24th you said "I haven't had any further casework so far that would drive me spending time on this other than investigating in a more general way." I took this to mean that you wouldn't be persuing this until you had an individual who had personally made a dropped kerb application contact you . LS1234 has said on here that she has PM'd you details of her/his application and I guess must fulfill this criteria ,so I'm just wondering if you have any results to share ?

I think she ( the 13 year old ) was very enterprising and sensible to post on here about her phone . Hope her phoneless situation is sorted soon .

Thought it was terrific . Very funny indeed . But then I loved twentytwelve Olympic Deliverance spoof .

James - back to double yellow lines across new dropped kerbs and extending 2 metres either side . I know on Oct 24th you said "I haven't had any further casework so far that would drive me spending time on this other than investigating in a more general way." I took this to mean that you wouldn't be persuing this until you had an individual who had personally made a dropped kerb application contact you . LS1234 has said on here that she has PM'd you details of her/his application and I guess must fulfill this criteria ,so I'm just wondering if you have any results to share ?

The density on the site will be 525 habitable rooms per hectare ,much higher than Southwark's recommended 200-350 . http://planningonline.southwark.gov.uk/DocsOnline/Documents/341017_1.pdf But the room sizes all meet the reguirements and apparently high density is ok if the standard of the design is exemplary . Though how ones balances a largely subjective criteria against an absolute ,I don't know .

Inclined to agree with first mate .And it doesn't look a mess to me .

Wow . And another not on Facebook ( work of the devil IMO ) and grateful for updates here .

" undue concern by Southwark officers to Harris-the-Carpet-King and his burgeoning private empire of dodgy 'academies'. "Not a single leaf in your grounds? Certainly sir, certainly!" " Unusually ( for me ) that aspect hadn't crossed my mind . But now that it's been raised .... odd that the one tree behind the Academy fence and on " their " ( given to them by Southwark on a long lease ) land is already dead .

Good post Lee. I understand from Robin C H that a madness similar to that which requires new dropped kerbs to have double yellow lines extending 2 metres across neighbouring properties ,also requires newly planted trees to have a metre square tree pit . So planting new trees is going to be tricky except where very wide pavements exist . Not East Dulwich but I'm very upset by the work ( carried out as seems usual in Southwark in summer when the trees were in full leaf } by the extreme pollarding to the trees in Highshore Rd which used to provide some softening of the view of acres of asphalt of the Academy playground .https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.4711546,-0.0738415,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s6nqRVLBF2FpYSb5oODOaFg!2e0

There is some suggestion that staff are less than happy at Harris Boys http://antiacademies.org.uk/2014/02/nutnasuwt-issues-first-strike-notice-at-a-harris-academy-harris-boys-academy-east-dulwich/ http://www.harrisdulwichboys.org.uk/28/latest-news/article/117/nut-nasuwt-strike-action So I guess there may be a high turnover .

Kiera - I absolutely agree about Whateley Rd and Lordship lane and I too got the " I'm dealing with it " response from JB when I asked if the bins could be relocated . Yesterday while waiting to turn right at this junction the chap behind me ,impatient I assume at the delay ,overtook and roared out into LL causing on coming cars to swerve .( obviously more to do with his mental health than the poor visibilty I know )

Many ,many sympathies PB . Not sure what else to say . Worrying that the planning conditions are so easily flouted and that it's up to residents to police them .

The argument about whether the existing building is " incongruous " is a red herring isn't it ? Or is it just to pave the way to get a very incongrous design accepted ? And thinking about the existing property ,someone has pointed out to me that houses with 130 or less sq metres are not considered suitable in this area for subdivision . I wonder if that might be a factor here in wishing to demolish and replace with 2 units ? Regarding building in back gardens - can you give an example where this has happened ? Actually built in a back garden ,not on a garage court ,not on a site previously in use as a commercial property ( be it joinery/police station/garden centre/plant nursery )? While I agree that all applications are unique and that 30 Hindmans is unusual it is by no means true that long gardens are a rarity in East Dulwich .You've only to look at map to see the space behind Barry Rd ,Friern Rd ,Forest Hill Rd etc The Dulwich Supplemental Planning Document is described as This SPD will be part of our framework of planning documents. It will be a material planning consideration in deciding planning applications. It will help ensure that the council makes decisions transparently and provides clarity for members of the public and developers . and has more weight than you imply . And you do little for your credibilty by making wild statements like " the SPD is a very good and useful document but if always totally adhered to we would have no new flat developments in East Dulwich and the housing crisis would be further enlarged."

Thank you very much TG ,that's really helpful.

In the past I've taken my mother to a service organised by "The Dulwich Foundation " . Think it involved the local private schools cadet forces . Does anyone know what is happening this year ? Or have any details to similar local services ?

I agree Penguin . And firstmate . no one will be drumming up my support .

I think that's very fair of the architects to come on the forum . I'm still looking at the application and can see how much work has gone in to it - much more than some . I'll come back with specific questions if I have any .

Yes Slad , you're trying really hard not to divert the thread by getting sidetracked into one where people jump in to criticise others aren't you ?

SLad - horse . high . get off of .

And ( re 30 Hindmans ) spouts the same old tosh ( some of it seemingly lifted from the application for 21 Hindmans ) about existing examples of houses built on backland . 97 and 99 Crystal Palace Rd for example . Perhaps they're confusing garden centre for garden ,Police Station for garden ? That degree of spin makes me seriously doubt the accuracy /reliabilty of the rest of the application .

Bit harsh SLad . Minder seemed to me to be pointing out that in the Lewisham incident the police et al could have been a little more proactive in keeping the traffic moving .

messageRe: Petition re Dulwich Hospital site new Posted by samstopit Today, 12:17PM Tessa Jowell has tweeted a link to an update on the Harris web site which confirms that Harris Nunhead has been put back to 2016 subject to a site being found and consultation with local families. http://www.harrisfederation.org.uk/26/future-projects/20/harris-primary-academy-nunhead ( to save people having to scroll back )

There are 2 issues here - 1 whether the development is appropriate and should have been approved and 2 the impact of the building works on the neighbours . Nos 2 is worth complaining about . There is a planning condition that requires the builders to work in a certain way . By the sound of it the builders are not working in a considerate way . This is worth complaining about and it needs to be reported to planning enforcement .http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200500/planning_enforcement/3256/how_to_make_a_complaint Has this been done ?

Blimey ,I thought you did too meant that the man had crapped by the tree as well .