Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I previously posted this under the heading 'Peckham South' but then seemed to get blocked from editing it because it was about 'Peckham South'. So I posted again to ask if the area the Council has proposed naming 'Peckham South', could equally, or should be called East Dulwich North? The point is that it straddles the area as we know from many previous discussions on the border of East Dulwich, many people refer to the southern part of it as East Dulwich, and many people who live in it already do often discuss our neighbourhood in this EDForum. That is why I think it is appropriate that we are able to have the discussion here. I hope others think that is helpful.


Previous information:


The Council are now consulting on the ?Preferred Options? PNAAP (Peckham & Nunhead Area Action Plan). I am starting this thread about one particular part of what they call Character Areas. This is a new section they have included in the PNAAP to subdivide the SE15 area into five, more local, sub-areas. You can find the whole text for this on pages 84 - 114 in the PNAAP. The five areas are shown in this pdf map extracted from the PNAAP.


The Council propose to call one of these Areas Peckham South. This is the neighbourhood north of Lordship Lane, including Goose Green. The policy text for this is in pages 100 ? 106 in the PNAAP It covers the SE15 streets to the west of Rye Lane. This includes the Bellenden area, where there are many EDF people, and so seems useful to create a thread here to discuss the proposals and the issues. These issues include:

1. The proposed boundary of 'Peckham South'

2. Development of back land sites

3. Poor design of infill developments

4. Shopping frontages

5. Open Space

6. Traffic

7. Car parking

8. Public realm / built environment


If you live or work in or know the ?Peckham South? neighbourhood do please read the text pages 100-106 link above, and contribute to the discussion on those or any other issues.


You can find some comments and suggestions on some of the issues here.


The comments have to be with the Council by 24th April; email your comments with your name, street and postcode to [email protected] If you don?t want those personal details to appear publically say that clearly.


You should be able to see the paper copy of the PNAAP in the libraries, and you can get a copy by post by asking for one giving your name and address:

- email: [email protected]

- phone: 020 7525 5471


I?d like to end this introduction by asking who, reading this, has already seen the PNAAP and is aware of the consultation timetable ending 24 April 2012? I hope we can have a real discussion here about this proposed 'Peckham South' Character Area plan!

> The EDF is saying it won't accept my previous post because it is not about East Dulwich.


Eileen:


The area sourh of Choumert Grove and west of Rye Lane is the historic East Dulwich parish.


Admin:


The Action Plan boundary takes in huge chunks of East Dulwich south of East Dulwich Road.


John K

I have looked at Figure 18: Peckham South Vision on page 101 of the Action Plan. East Dulwich Road forms the Southern boundary to the area so am unclear where "the huge chunks of East Dulwich south of East Dulwich Road" are. Also, for the sake of clarification, Goose Green is not included within the Action Plan.

Administrator Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I ain't said nuffink about accepting your previous

> post, leave me out of it.


Dear Administrator ? After I posted first under the title *Peckham South - Character Area for the PNAAP* and then tried to edit it was impossible to get back into it. I then noticed this under the subject heading: **Messages in this section must be about issues specific to East Dulwich. The local business section is here** and I thought that was a message saying the post was being rejected. But now I have been able to get in and edit this post and restore the links so it looks OK again, and we can have the discussion. Thank you.

nxjen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I have looked at Figure 18: Peckham South Vision

> on page 101 of the Action Plan. East Dulwich Road

> forms the Southern boundary to the area so am

> unclear where "the huge chunks of East Dulwich

> south of East Dulwich Road" are. Also, for the

> sake of clarification, Goose Green is not included

> within the Action Plan.


I am not sure what John K has in mind on "the huge chunks of East Dulwich south of East Dulwich Road"; maybe he would like to expand? You can see from the map of the five Character Areas exactly what is covered by the PNAAP and the boundary of the proposed Peckham South.


One of the issues about the proposed boundary is that it cuts the Bellenden* part of the neighbourhood in two as it follows the ward boundary between The Lane ward and the South Camberwell ward. *This is 'Bellenden' as in the boundary of the Bellenden Renewal scheme 1997-2007 which formed the basis of a sort of emerging neighbourhood identity south of the railway line, but subsumed within the wider one of Rye Lane West including north of the railway line. These areas are easier to see in the map on the BRG website here.


Ward boundaries are administrative and often arbitrary for electoral purposes. This has its inconveniences but it is inevitable as population numbers shift around. But for producing a text which is about a planning Character Area I would suggest is not sensible, nor is it necessary as it just needs to be mentioned in the text that the ward boundaries are not congruent with the actual 'character area'. I cover these points in the issues note here.


It is in that context of the Character Area that Goose Green is included, as it is an essential part of the Character Area between East Dulwich Road and Peckham Road. We who live in that area, and have taken an active part in local planning matters for many years, have called the area 'Rye Lane West neighbourhood? based on what the Council was calling it in previous naming exercises. See the map and text under boundary and character of Rye Lane West neighbourhood on the Bellenden Residents? Group website here. Further background to that and more on the boundary matter you can see in this note here.


I hope others can give their views about the boundary issue in relation to what makes sense from a Planning perspective in producing a ?Character Area?. It doesn?t need to be contentious if we remember that it is about what makes sense in giving a description of the character of the area for planning purposes. I would suggest that excluding the streets in the South Camberwell ward territory in the SW corner of Bellenden is not sensible from a planning ?Character Area ?perspective.

PeckhamRose Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> A 'character area'. Nope, I'm lost.


Hi Peckham Rose ? have a look at this map of the five Character Areas


You can see from that exactly what area is covered in each of the five ?Character Areas?.


Next see if you live in one of those. If you do, then look up the proposed description of that area - covering your own neighbourhood - in the PNAAP between pages 84 ? 114 of the PNAAP. Page 84 gives a brief explanation of what a 'Character Area ' is for the PNAAP.


Then you can see what they mean by Character Area as it affects your own immediate surroundings. Does that help to explain what this is about, and how close to home it is?

As you are reading this post, please look at this map and see if where you live or run a business or work is in one of the five ?Character Areas? marked out there.


If it is in the area marked Peckham South then please look at this note about the issues that need to be thought about by anyone living or working there. The draft plan for that area is on pages 100 ? 106 in the PNAAP. If you have any thoughts about the issues any of that raises I hope you will post something here so it can contribute to the discussion.


If you live in another area marked out on that map as a ?Character Area?, you will find the text for the draft plan for it in pages 84 ? 114 in the PNAAP. Then you can decide what issues, if any there that you would like to raise for discussion here or elsewhere.

Why are there two Peckham Easts? The north one should be called Peckham North East.

And if these little geographic areas are to be split in to such small areas, why are three distinct different areas all lumped into one characters area called Nunhead Peckham Rye and Honor Oak?


And what is the point of all this? I mean, why are we concerning ourselves with politicians' games of boundary definition? There are lots of different characters and areas within the one big so-called character area of Nunhead Peckham Rye and Honor Oak. For starters even Nunhead has different areas within it.

PeckhamRose Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Why are there two Peckham Easts? The north one should be called Peckham North East.

> And if these little geographic areas are to be split in to such small areas, why are three distinct different areas

> all lumped into one characters area called Nunhead Peckham Rye and Honor Oak?

> And what is the point of all this? I mean, why are we concerning ourselves with politicians' games of

> boundary definition? There are lots of different characters and areas within the one big so-called

> character area of Nunhead Peckham Rye and Honor Oak. For starters even Nunhead has different areas within it.


These points about the boundaries and sizes of the Character Areas are useful and relevant points to make in your comments to the council.


But this exercise is not just about boundary definition - it is also and much more about the detailed content of proposed planning policies. Which of the five areas do you live in PeckhamRose? Have you read the policy pages for that area? Do you agree with them?


Is there anything you want changed? Is there anything missing that you want added? If your answer to those two questions is no then there is no action for you.


I hope that others who check into this topic discussion can focus on the content of the policy proposals for their own areas and see if there is anything they want to use this forum to discuss.


Focusing on boundary issues, to the exclusion of the policy content, is missing a good opportunity to discuss with other residents some key planning policy issues affecting our futures.

If every single person who offered opinions, all said we did not want more speed humps (and of course that won't happen because some people love them), would the council get rid of them? Course not. Done deal. Call me an old cynic (I'm trying to remain smiling from previous post in Positive News), but really, council have their agenda and probably a big hangar with the year's budget worth of road humps. If they don't use them all this year they won't get more for next year. Every year I ask for more bike parks in useful areas. Every year am ignored, and that's just ONE tiny tiny question in the big scheme of things. I did not 'vote' for the way the Consort Road one way system has been changed and for the way the changes have occurred on Peckham Rye East Side. I voted for other options. And if more people did than not, then fine, they got their way and that is good democracy at work. But we never get to hear the results of the votings. So we/I just assume the council does what it wants to anyway. And I am more intelligent than that but experience beats me down.
  • 5 weeks later...
Eileen - thank you for the post. I realise it's too late (haven't been on the forum for a while) for submissions, but still good to catch up with some of the Council plans. If this goes ahead, i'll be in Peckham South, and actually, i'd be very happy with that. I do live in Peckham, SE15 (just north of East Dulwich Rd) but to be able to describe it a bit more precisely would help (i tend to say 'South Peckham' or 'near Peckham Rye' in any case).

Agree with genie. There's a pungent whiff of snobbery going on here.


Reading between the lines, guessing the whole underlying reason certain people on here don't want to live in an area called 'Peckham South' is that 'East Dulwich' for them means a nice, warm, fuzzy halo effect on the price of their property and their middle class aspiration.

I think the point the OP was making was that the "Peckham South" Character Area contains streets which people consider East Dulwich so a thread about it should be allowed on the East Dulwich Forum rather than it should be renamed. Also the proposed South Peckham area splits the ?Bellenden Area? so it probably makes sense to shift the boarder to include the other streets in the ?Bellenden Area? as they are similar in character, have one residents association and therefore should considered in conjunction in terms of the council?s action plan policy.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...