Rowanofski

@northernmonkey - yes, Pickwick Rd is the reference, but the camera we were caught by is entering Dulwich Village from the roundabout by Gallery / College Rd. Having since gone back on my bike to check, I would disagree strongly about the significant amount of signage for this restriction. There is one sign on each side of the road (one of which is obscured by a tree on the approach), they are not lit and there are no road markings about a bus gate. On top of this, 25m or so before the roundabout (Gallery Rd) approach has a sign stating no left turn (into Burbage) during the restricted hours, but doesn't mention straight on (into Dulwich Village). It's a Southwark cash-cow, pure and simple. Anyway, no point in me moaning away here! Hopefully it makes others aware and I will go appeal the fine in the meantime and drop a note to the local councillors to try and either remove the restriction or make signage clearer.

Grrrrr. Seems like they have stopped giving warnings now. My wife just got a ?65 ("reduced") charge for this exact spot. We don't drive often so had no idea about any of this. Seems like a ludicrous restriction when they've closed so many other routes and it doesn't seem very clearly signed at all. :-(

No problem... I saw it on LinkedIn and just didn't think there would be too many full-time Mums who make LinkedIn a part of their daily routine!

Saw this the other day and thought there might be a number of Mums around here who could be interested... Deadline is this Friday. https://careers.jpmorgan.com/careers/global/en/programs/reentry-program It's basically a 14 week programme for experienced professional women (across all divisions; Technology, Business etc - no banking experience required) who have been out of the workplace for 2 years or more. There is then apparently a strong chance of a permanent role at the end of it (potentially on a flexible working basis). Full disclosure - I work at JP Morgan and really enjoy it here, but am not involved with this. Just thought it looked like a good initiative worth sharing. Good luck with it if you do apply!

I really cannot add any more than what has already been said by every single other comment here. Just so incredibly rare to have such universal praise, love and respect without exception on here! How many shop owners would inspire a 4 yr old to bring back a holiday present for them before than their own grandparents?!! Thank you and good luck Raj, Nilesh & Anita.

You may already be aware of the proposed expansion of Quarry Court (2 Dunstans Grove), whereby a property developer is seeking to double the occupancy by building upwards and outwards, remove parking, build street-facing dormer windows, balconies and a roof terrace (none of which would be granted to an average home around here). This application was already refused a little over a year ago by Southwark Planning and then again at the highest level of the National Planning Inspectorate. Sadly, that was not enough to dissuade the developers' greed and they have reapplied with some minor tweaks, but the council / inspectorate reasons for refusal are still present (essentially to say it would be overbearing and out of keeping with the area). However, Southwark Planning have made a U-turn and are currently intending to approve the application (without stating why) despite the local councillors all still opposing the revised development (Jon Hartley, Maggie Browning, Renata Hamvas, Victoria Mills, Gavin Edwards & James Barber). Due to this opposition and the significant volume of objections (47 at the last count), the case is being decided at a Planning Committee, this Wednesday 27th June @ 6.30pm. This committee can refuse the application! Whilst these committees are independent, they are known to be significantly swayed by community strength and public opinion, which is where you come in. If you are opposed to the proposed plan and could possibly spare half hour of your time, please come and show your support at the meeting near to London Bridge station, this Wednesday! It is the first item on the agenda, so should mean we can all leave early. Placards and vocal opposition make a big impact! Who: YOU!! And as many friends and family as you can bring! What: Quarry Court (2 Dunstans Grove) planning committee meeting Where: Ground Floor Meeting Room (G02) - 160 Tooley St, London, SE1 2QH Why: To prevent the greed of one company impacting the community. When: Wed 27th June @ 6.30pm Additional info: Details of the application can be found on the https://southwark.gov.uk/planning website by searching for Quarry Court or the reference 17/AP/3997 The National Planning Inspectorate's reasons for refusal last year can be viewed at https://acp.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/ViewCase.aspx?caseid=3164939 The agenda for this Planning Committee (with details of the case) can be found here - http://moderngov.southwarksites.com/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=351&MId=6137&Ver=4 Hope to see as many of you there as possible, whether you are new to the area or have been here 50 years!

Bonjour. Would anyone happen to know of any local sale of Christmas trees? Only just getting to move back into my house for Xmas today, so Ideally looking for a cut price bargain!

Thanks for flagging this Amber - disappointing that interested parties from the last case weren't notified of this, but it seems they are treating it as a "new" application. The last one was ultimately rejected by both Southwark Council and the National Planning Inspectorate for various reasons, but specifcally "being out of character and appearance of the area" and the "effect on living conditions of neighbouring residents with particular reference to outlook". From what I can see, the "new" application is almost as bad as the original. They've reduced it a small bit, but ultimately still proposed a very large street-facing dormer extension and an open roof terrace right on the public road (Dunstans Grove). I have registered my new objections to the slightly adjusted plans and TODAY is the deadline for anyone else wanting to do so! As Amber says, I'm sure the volume of objections would really help, so please do write your concerns on the Southwark site today, even if it is simply one sentence.

For any interested parties, there is a very tight deadline (TOMORROW, Thursday 2nd March!) to oppose the Developer's Appeal, which will be considered by the National Planning Inspectorate. The more representations they receive, the more powerful our case will be. Please ?make representation? on their portal at https://acp.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/ Application number: 3164939. The key is to register new objections related to the developers? appeal rather than repeat the objections you may have made previously. Southwark?s Director of Planning rejected the proposal for three main reasons. In summary 1. The building would have ?inappropriate scale and massing to the rear and at roof level, resulting in an incongruous and overbearing feature in the streetscene? 2. The roof terrace would be overbearing and dominant, out of character with the area 3. The internal space of the flats was below standards and ?unacceptably cramped?. The developers have moved some internal walls to address point three, but they are appealing to retain all the external additions and changes to which we originally objected. A couple of suggestions... APPEAL TO REFUSAL REASON 1 (excessive bulk, out of scale with surroundings) Developers say: it will enhance the building; that there is no set pattern in the surrounding streets so it doesn?t matter if it doesn?t fit in; that it is on a ?similar? footprint to the existing building; that its height and massing ?responds? to nearby buildings, and that the materials [white plaster and metal cladding] have been chosen to fit the ?rhythm? of existing buildings. Finally they point out that the site is in an area with ?very little character? and that ?any harm caused by [their] proposed development? to the look of the area is outweighed by the additional flat created. APPEAL TO REASON 2 (roof terraces do not fit the area) The developer?s appeal here is contradictory and difficult to summarise. They say that the surroundings have no set pattern so there is nothing to fit in with; then they say it has been designed to ?integrate? with its surroundings. Then they say (as a matter of opinion) that it is not of a ?visually dominating? scale; then they say ?in some circumstances a contrasting modern design can be successful? (quoting a Southwark Residential Design Standard). A few key points you may wish to consider: ? There are currently NO front-facing (i.e. street-visible) Dormer windows on any house on Dunstans Grove, Dunstans Road or further afield within the neighbouring area ? There are currently NO other roof terraces in the local area ? There are currently NO other buildings in the neighbourhood with four full height floors. ? The area is clearly characterised by Victorian/Georgian homes forming the vast majority of the buildings along Dunstans Rd / Grove and beyond. ? The design comments are subjective, but features such as metal cladding and white plaster on such a large scale would make Quarry Court stand out for all the wrong reasons. ? The developer?s survey which claimed parking stress of ~53% included the whole stretch of Peckham Rye up to Harris Academy (both sides), which is clearly not viable.

For anyone who has an interest in this matter, a small group of us will be meeting at the Herne Tavern tomorrow from 8:30pm. Hope to see as many there as possible to figure out the best course of action. All input greatly appreciated. Rowan

So, the grounds of appeal has finally been made available. I have not yet had a chance to fully digest, but attach this here. An initial scan seems that they have drawn reference to a Parking Survey which reported there is more than ample parking space for the area. A neighbour who looked into this at the time, found that they conducted their survey to include a large stretch of Peckham Rye (i.e. alongside Piermont Green) which is never parked upon, since it would be dangerous to do so. My other initial impression is that they refer to amended plans, but again, these have not been placed on Southwark's website, so hard to contest. I will ask again to make sure that ALL documents are uploaded. I will be looking to set up a meeting next week to discuss this case in person with anyone who has an interest, so please PM me if you would like to join us. Thanks, Rowan

Thanks again Ian, I did query the date given by Southwark with the PI and they confirmed your concerns - the letter is at odds with the PI date and 2nd March is the official deadline. The PI deadline of 2nd March is the real one here. That said, I would encourage any representations sooner than later. As for the appellants's statement and supporting documents, they really are the essential missing pieces right now. I chased the planning officer (Anthony Roberts) again and he assured me they would be uploaded by today. Annoying that this comes a week after the original start date. Rowan

Hi, just a mild dispute going on in the Ofski household right now! With the new Costa about to appear in Peckham, I said that there was another one before it, but I can't back this up with where or when and my wife swears there wasn't! Long story short, can anyone confirm if there was a Costa coffee shop in Peckham before? (apparently petrol station ones don't count!) There's a coffee resting on the outcome of this, though, rest assured we will both be claiming from an independent! ;-)

Thanks Ian. I tried those URLs. Unfortunately neither link provides any detail as to why they are specifically appealing the council's rejection of planning permission, only that they are appealing. The Appeal Form gives a long list of documents provided to Southwark but none of those are provided on either site. Having also reread the Start Letter however (the inspectorate notifying Southwark), that does state that Southwark have until 2nd Feb to make all appeal documents available to the public, so a slim hope this may be uploaded today. If not, we still don't know the grounds of their appeal and are losing precious time to respond. I will chase the planning officer today, but once again would be most grateful if Renata is also able to speak with them to ensure this is made public ASAP.

Thanks for posting this update Sarah-Marie. It is really disappointing indeed, especially so that the notification comes NINE weeks after the appeal deadline closed. I really thought it was case closed. Sadly, I already queried this and was told they did register it in time but it wasn't uploaded until now due to a backlog at the inspectorate. As Renata says, I think it is really important we respond to the appeal again, but that is proving difficult just now since nobody has made the grounds of their appeal available to us yet. That in itself must surely be breaching the inspectorate guidelines given the appeal is underway and we have such a short window to respond? Anyway, I am chasing on getting sight of this so will share here as soon as I get any luck. If Renata is able to get access to this, I'd be most grateful. Rowan