Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Louisa,


You are right. I think also that it was anticipated in some quarters that the freeholder/developer/applicant would keep re-submitting until any objectors gave up or rolled over, as you say, without making any real changes to the original proposal.

Does anyone have any helpful insight as to why acknowledgments to comments for the application are taking so long to come through and also why no additional "Neighbour consulation replies" are appearing on the website?

So far only 3 "in favour" of the application are showing yet I know there are more comments submitted...

Please do submit views for or against the latest planning application for this site.

A small request please copy me as a ward councillor on any email submissions so I can check I haven't missed anything I should have raised.

I was in Iceland a couple of days ago & asked re when it was closing down. I was told it wasn't closing & that lease has been extended. Didn't ask how long but I do hope they stay as I find it great for a fair part of my shopping.

James Barber Wrote:

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

> Please do submit views for or against the latest

> planning application for this site.

> A small request please copy me as a ward

> councillor on any email submissions so I can check

> I haven't missed anything I should have raised.


Being disingenuous again, JB! Asking people to copy you in on emails to the planning dept is applying unnecessary pressure on planning officers when they see councillors copied in. If you are such a caring and diligent local representative then you should ask to have emails forwarded to you, not copied. I wonder what the scrutiny committee will make of this latest attempt of yours.

unlurked Wrote:

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

> James Barber Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Please do submit views for or against the latest

> > planning application for this site.

> > A small request please copy me as a ward

> > councillor on any email submissions so I can

> check

> > I haven't missed anything I should have raised.

>

> Being disingenuous again, JB! Asking people to

> copy you in on emails to the planning dept is

> applying unnecessary pressure on planning officers

> when they see councillors copied in. If you are

> such a caring and diligent local representative

> then you should ask to have emails forwarded to

> you, not copied. I wonder what the scrutiny

> committee will make of this latest attempt of

> yours.


You don't really think that planners are such wimps that seeing emails copied to JB will scare them do you? I would be very worried indeed if they were. JB is a relatively gentle individual compared to the average building developer. Copying JB in to an email is considerably more open to scrutiny, and far preferable, than blind copying or forwarding the email.

So far as I can tell, JB didn't ask that he be placed THREATENINGLY in copy of e-mails; only that he be placed in copy. Blind copy, no threat. Forwarded, no threat.


I don't think that JB has been disingenuous. But then again, I'm disposed to think favourably of him. He sorted out the lights display at the entrance to East Dulwich railway station, and that display, newly repaired and colourised, has rejoiced me over and over again.

milk76 Wrote:

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

> Best just to ignore Unlurked John. He has some

> petty axe to grind against James Barber and does

> so, with the repetitivity of an unloved season,

> across the threads. There are always a couple in

> every constituency.



'milk', your only interest in this is your selfish retail food snobbery rather than any interest or knowledge of planning law, local govt, or democracy let alone local residents concerns as can be seen from this ignorant post of yours

milk76 Wrote:

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

> Excellent, can't wait. I have been looking

> forward to an M&S for over a decade now.


You are just sour milk, well off.

KK,


Think consultation has been extended by a day- so last day tomorrow. It turns out that many residents in Chesterfield have not received a letter from the council and so were oblivious to the most recent application. Overall this does not look reflect well on the Council.

To be fair, unless a clear instruction to suppress from elected representatives can be found, it reflects poorly on the officials (planning office) rather than the elected representatives (which is what we normally think of when we say 'The Council'). Councillors (and even those on the planning committee) do not have direct oversight of day-to-day official processes. It is only if a failure to notify can be shown to be a systemic problem that we might expect councillors to be there to take the rap for this - for failure to take this up with officials. (Or if councillors specifially instructed officials to leave people out of the notification process or to truncate the consulation time.)
Penguin68, take your point, by Council I meant Southwark Council Planning Dept- but agree, would have helped if I had clarified. No smear of councillors intended, though would imagine they might be interested to know that residents who will be affected by this development have received no notification at all.

Let's just hope for all the people on Chesterfield that they at least get a fair crack of the whip with regards the same issues as last time. With no major amendments to the actual application it appears to be a drawn out waiting game. As KK points put, it would certainly have been helpful for a large company like M&S to have a public meeting to at least help remedy some of the concerns local residents have, if Picturehouse can do it not sure why M&S can't, just common courtesy really.


Louisa.

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

    • But Thatcher is dead. Nobody since has brought the utilities back under public ownership (if that's the right term). So there are many people who could be blamed. Meanwhile the shareholders get richer and everyone else gets increasing bills and a poorer service. Plus as said above, a massive waste of a limited resource like water. Not to mention the polluted rivers and seas. At least the privatisation of the railways is being reversed. Hopefully water may be on the list somewhere.
    • That's really helpful. Do the Community Councils still exist? It sounds to me that whoever the contact is on the council who has sorted out the North Cross Road notice board and put the new list of councillors in it must at least have access to the key for that one? Unless it was one of the unlocked ones. And of course if somebody knows where the keys are, they may have no idea that people are looking for them or that this forum thread exists. Which are the notice boards which are not locked?  The very helpful locksmith near the station (?Callows?)  might be able to provide keys for them, or if not, new locks, in return for some local publicity? In fact, they may be able to advise in general, rather than keep trying unresponsive people at the council. But then of course there is still the question of who is going to take responsibility for putting appropriate East Dulwich community information into them and updating it as necessary.
    • Our residents' association used to have keys many moons ago, but when locks were changed, we tried everyone (including ward councillors) to get keys to no avail. A couple of boards are not locked. The Community Councils originally paid for all the notice boards in Dulwich. May have come under the Cleaner Greener budget.
    • Blame Margaret Thatcher - she started the privatization of public utilities.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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