Jump to content

Recommended Posts

We have a petition say no to caffe nero. They opened the cafe without planning permission and are now trying to get people to make the council allow them to carry on. Since they opened have they not been trading illegally they have been earning a lot of money which is illegal. they should have got permission first. they have come into this area with no regard for the people they ride rufshod over the council who we elected not them. if they are allowed to carry on trading they are saying that we do not need a planning department and other developers will follow the lead. we need to make a stand this is our community and borough. please go to the say-no-to-caffe- nero and lets make them know whos area this is.
I seriously hope you have your facts right. My objection is that East Dulwich is great because it has very few high street chains in it. The best way to keep it maintained as such is not to use them. I only go to small concerns and avoid larger chain stores. eg Sommerfields, Caffe Nero, Foxtons and that dreary clothing place opposite Foxtons are all good examples.

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

    • A friend has asked me to recommend Juliene for regular cleaning as she has some slots available. Her phone number is 07751426567
    • I'd put short odds on that but who would be his likely successor?
    • Hi, I went to the council's planning portal to look at the application, and I encourage others to look at it. It looks like a pleasant building, with thoughtful landscaping. as Pugwash said, the big oak would be retained, only two smaller trees are supposed to be cut, one of which is already dead according to the Tree Survey. It sounds like 38 people in great need of it will gain supported housing thanks to this development, a very positive change. Of course a solution has to be found for the 3 who will need to find other accommodation during the works, but that doesn't seem enough of a reason to oppose the development. The current building is 4 stories, so I would be surprised if one extra storey was considered objectionable, especially considering the big oak stands between the building and the neighbours' back gardens and the fact that the neighbours it's backing onto are all 5 stories houses themselves or only have blank walls facing the building. In the context where affordable housing is sorely missing, a 100% supported housing development is great news. Personally I've never seen a less objectionable planning request
    • I also wonder if all this, recently events and so many u turns is going to also be the end of Kier Starmer.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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