intexasatthe moment

Roundabout thanks but I've looked on line at Southwark and it's not clear to me what the "Development Department " is . Have you spotted contact details ?

Can anyone give me this ? Southwark's website just says contact "the Development Management department" .

Thanks nashoi . I spent a long time yesterday trying to run Malwarebytes in safe mode but it wouldn't launch . I did do a system restore and then had to delete all the suspect programmes and extensions again . Nothing seemed to work but I run a maintenance check as prompted and that eventually seemed to get rid . But can't help thinking it'll reappear . But thanks for help ,others had ppreviously suggested safe mode but I hadn't understood that they meant to run Malwarebytes in safe mode .

I've googled this and following instructions have deleted programs and extensions .And run an adware removal programme . But it's still there ,driving me crazy . I have McAfee and Malwarebytes anti malware installed on my windows 8 system . The Malwarebytes just keeps crashing . Anyone any simplish advice ?

tfwsfoll - if there's no cpz how is the car freeness enforced ?

I think the public transport provision is fantastic . And if you compare it with other towns/cities in the UK we are very ,very lucky . Much greater investment in transport in London than anywhere else .

But on the other hand ,if you buy a house that's already been underpinned and has a certificate of competency ,isn't that a good thing ? In that lots of houses in this clay soil area need underpinning and at least such a house has already had it done ?

But they're so nice ,they cheer me up . Priceless . Though of course I guess most people aren't as sad as me ....

quick print at corner of Maxted and Oglander Rd are the nicest people in the world and will be incredibly helpful 020 7639 6764

Thanks Trizza ,that makes sense . ( only just spotted your post )

Stephen Fry says it was all down to some technical thingy and that she wasn't miming . So I'm believing that she didn't . Though I did wonder how she could sing so effortlessly after seeming short of breath just before she started .But I assume that her lungs somehow spread into her bazooms and that her capacity differs from normal folk .

Sometimes making lists can help when overwhelmed . Remind yourself that the move WILL happen and all this will pass . Soon you will be in your new home . For now pack whatever you can ,get rid of any stuff that you can ,tick things off your lists . I quite like this quote from http://lifeafterlondon.com/useful-information/lifestyle-articles/how-to-keep-calm-when-relocating/ "The ?secret? of calm relocation is self-esteem. Your ?old life? no matter whether you love it, hate it, or a bit of both, will, to a certain extent feel safe and familiar. Now, with only change ahead of you, it can potentially be difficult to maintain your self-esteem (a combination of self-confidence and self-worth) when very little is the staying the same." But ...it doesn't acknowledge the sheer hard work involved . I suspect the secret of calm relocation is an army of servants ! Breathe ,one day at a time . You're going to get there .

This is an extract from LondonMix's link to The Sutton Trust research . It's a quote from people interviewed during the course of the research but clearly the view that having to sit a seperate secondary school based test might disadvantage some is a view held by those who work in education . "The use of multiple banding tests within the same area was criticised by some interviewees for several reasons. First, it was suggested that separate banding tests could limit access to schools for some pupils. Thus, a headteacher of an oversubscribed school explained that the school would ?definitely not? use its own banding test: By using a common test across all of the primary schools it means that we have the fairest way possible to ensure that every child has the opportunity to access schools of their choice? and by having a standard admission procedure across all schools it means that actually I?m doing my part to ensure that that?s the case. [Headteacher, oversubscribed school] This headteacher believed that a separate banding test could present an obstacle for some potential applicants. This view was also taken by the Admission Forum in Area A which had then worked hard to ensure a single banding test could be used by all schools and subsequently that all pupils should take that test within primary schools. So, some respondents took the view that separate banding tests could discourage some potential applicants from applying to a school and that it could be the most disadvantaged pupils who would be the least likely to take multiple tests. " The report does conclude that there is " a very strong case for " pupils to be only required to sit one banding test and for that to be valid for any school using banding to which they apply " It also concludes "Our findings suggest that, in striving to achieve balanced intakes, banding for the purposes of admission is not a panacea. It can however contribute to creating more balanced intakes than would otherwise be the case. " It gives explanations of local ( as per Lewisham ) and proportionate ( as per Harris ) banding methods and their effects so is worth a read if you're into that stuff .

LondonMix ,Lewisham secondary schools ( all except Habs ) use the data from primary schools but I don't know of any secondary schools in Southwark that do . Harris and Kingsdale applicants have to sit another test ( NVR which as you've previously pointed out is felt to offer more " stable " results than the primary school ones ) to determine banding . I can see that having to sit a seperate test may disadvantage some sections of the community ,but like you I'd be interested to learn more detail . Though possibly a discussion here isn't terribly relevant to the thread .

Southwark could make a recommendation for building on MOL but the Mayor and the relevant sec of state decide . The last time S'wark made a recommendation to approve building on this site it was rejected and they had to send in more arguments etc before it was accepted . So it's not as simple as saying S'wark should grant planning permission .

I guess you've looked at these 5.6 Extensions 5.6.1 The residential design standards SPD (2011) sets out the standards that should be required when considering proposals for extensions that require planning permission. 5.6.2 Where extensions are proposed, they should be in keeping with the character of the area and for the most part follow the guidance set out in the residential design standards SPD. In some cases, however, larger development that exceeds the 3 metres by 3 metre threshold set out in the SPD could be considered. In particular detached and semi-detached properties with substantial gardens may accommodate a larger extension providing the openness of an area is not compromised, the design is clearly subservient to the main part of a building and it would not add appreciably to the building?s bulk. 5.6.3 Roof extensions and changes to the basic roof form within the conservation areas are generally likely to be intrusive and unacceptable. In those few cases where the roof is already altered or hidden from view, some alterations may be possible. In such cases, we will normally seek low-key solutions minimising any adverse visual impact through the use of sympathetic designs and appropriate materials. Further information is contained within the relevant conservation area appraisals. 5.6.4 The principle of roof extensions outside of conservation areas is generally acceptable provided that the scale and design of the extension follows the guidance contained within the residential design standards SPD. A roof extension, therefore, should normally be confined to the rear elevation of dwellings. It should be a subsidiary element to the building and thus set down from the ridge of the main house, in from either side of the roof slope and up from the eaves. 5.6.5 A roof extension will not be permitted if it would unbalance the proportions of a building or harm the architectural integrity of a group, including an unbroken run of butterfly roofs. Also, a roof extension will not be acceptable if it extends over the full length of the outrigger as this would not be considered a subsidiary or subservient element. Further information is contained within the residential design standards SPD 5.6.6 Roof extensions and extensions to the rear of a property can also have an impact on bat activity. All British bat species are afforded protection under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. As Dulwich is a known area for bat activity we may require extra information to be submitted with an application. Further information is set out in section 6.5 of this SPD and our Sustainable Design and Construction SPD. from the Dulwich SPD ?http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200151/supplementary_planning_documents_and_guidance/1247/dulwich_spd/1 and this Side extensions Side extensions should ? Be subsidiary to the main building ? If the side extension is proposed to be more than single storey, the upper floor should be set back from the side building line ? Have roofs that match those of existing buildings in terms of roof shapes and pitches ? Avoid the infilling of gaps between properties, where this is an important townscape feature. from http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200151/supplementary_planning_documents_and_guidance/1253/residential_design_standards_spd

My understanding is that Harris reference their bands to national ability ,so that a certain score on the NVF test they use would equate to a particular band . My understanding of Habs is that they rank each years cohort that have applied for the school in question . Kingsdale's system I find hard to understand but has scholarships thrown into the mix of banding and lottery . Do they allocate by distance as well ? Habs didn't co ordinate it's banding system with that used throughout Lewisham so they may be attached to their own system and won't necessarily align themselves with Harris . Though it's all a little theoretical at present . I must say I was very drawn to the nodal point method mentioned by Kristymac1's on the Charter School thread - "No-one yet has mentioned the possibility of measuring distance/banding from a specific nodal point - the nodal point being measured from the point by where there is greatest need/black hole."

But only if they all use the same type of banding .As far as I know the admissions policies for Habs ,Kingsdale and Harris are all different .

Thanks Penguin ,that all makes sense . It must be a myth about granting planning permission in this way . My memory is that it was a couple of years ago ,but I must be wrong . Not quite following your post Strafer - which may be my failure ,not yours ! I understand about needing less cars and definitely needing affordable housing . My point was - planning permission shouldn't be granted if it's dependent on a condition that can't be enforced .

We need more clues ! What does he do as a job ? Leisure ? I know it's a cliche but luxury socks ? Cashmere ?

Strafer - I think it would be a problem if Southwark granted permission on a condition that wasn't enforceable .

Yes that's my thinking . But I've got it in my head that permission was given on this basis somewhere . I've searched Southwark Planning for the Co op site because I think it related to that property ( when it was Somerfield ) but can't find anything .

I have heard that in the past planning permission was granted for a development on Lordship Lane - flats above a shop ,possibly what is now the Co Op - on condition that residents didn't own cars . Does anyone know if this is true ?

so sorry that you're still without help . Clockmakers museum????? http://www.clockmakers.org/museum-and-library/museum/

Nodal point - sounds like an excellent solution !