first mate

I have not heard of this trainer but having had a quick look at his site I would say his advice to 'practice removing your dog's food' without proper context or comment, does not invite confidence.

bonaome, so you'd rather no be involved?

Huguenot, Unless they happen upon a genuine planning issue- not beyond the bounds of probability. I'm also not of the view that planners never ever make bad decisions or mistakes. That aside, I'd be interested to know if the opinions/observations of residents next the site carry any weight whatsoever or are, as you state, sought merely to add a bit of flavour. Perhaps James or another planning savvy councillor, would enlighten us? Why even have a consultation if this is so?

Not a breed for the faint-hearted, as you know they have a strong guard instinct, unlike the staffy, which does not. I'm sure you will have already been in touch with breed specialists but just in case try the UK Boerboel club http://www.ukbc.co.uk/rightbreed.html - breed specialists will often come up with good tips in terms of training and what to expect. Any dog with a guard instinct needs to be sociliazed to the max with strong, confident leadership from its owners. I applaud you for seeing what needs to be done and for looking for a good training context. Again, do not leave it to someone else to train your dog. If the dog lives with you it must also respect and listen to you.

Another hung hunk is on the forum and this one helps ladies meet their wildest fantasies, for free- but he is not a murderer, he says.

I think they are all too shy...perhaps you are just too well hung..hunk.

e-dealer, everything you say makes perfect sense but are you inferring that the opportunity to object/comment- which is part of the current process, is a kind of irrelevant, wild goose chase?

Have you considered attending a dog training class in the evening? The best thing your puppy can learn is basic obedience and how to behave around other adult dogs without causing offence. Pups have already learned about other pups in the litter- learning impulse control around adults is the key, how to meet, greet and play politely. A trainer may train your dog for you, but it is far better that you do the training yourself since the primary bond is with you not your trainer and you wnat and need your dog to learn to behave with you. What breed is your puppy? Training classes are held at Beckenham Dog Training and at South Eastern Dog Training in South Norwood- (Sandra on 07852469499).

Huguenot, My point is that it is not "within reason" for those residents who need sufficent time to get a handle on the new application and to lodge objections, should there be any. The current time span is inconvenient and very short...3rd Jan. It is not about asking for a delay of months, just a bit more time, perhaps not in the run up to Christams and the New Year (one of the oldest planning tricks in the book, say some). These are not 'delaying tactics' but a reasonable request from those nearest to the site to have time to read and understand the application and its implications and where it differs to the last application, which was rejected. The freeholder and developer are looking after their interests, some of us residents just need a reasonable amount of time to look after ours. Please remember that we are not planners, it may not be as easy for us to quickly interpret the current application. As an aside I for one cannot get into much of the information online and I don't have time to make a special journey over to the planning office.

I do not see a conspiracy, I simply suggest that the process seems more advantageous to the applicant than it is to local residents, who may have objections to the proposals but have a very limited time to do so, much of that time falling over a holiday period. Residents also do not have the benefit of discussions with planning about the proposals and a sense of their thinking on matters like parking pressure, delivery schedules, delivery noise etc...

But if an application is dealt with "expeditously" isn't it fair to speculate that this might be more to the advantage of the developer, particularly if they have had a pre-application meeting (though all perfectly above board) to iron out any problems on the prior application that was rejected? Who does the time limit on objections and the positing of the application over a major holiday period work better for, in this case?

The point about the pre application talks was that the applicant asked that the processing of the application be speeded up and dealt with more 'expeditiously' than was the last application. As noted, the application has been entered over a busy, holiday period...'the oldest trick in the book', as other have said. No doubt this is all above board and 'legal' but it does seem to tip the balance in favour of the applicant- it is probably in the interests of the developer for the application to be sped through. It is probably in the interests of a number of locals to have the application slowed down a little, to give time to digest the content, to seek advice, and to mount objections, if relevant. To have to have objections in by 3rd January gives little time to do anything- especially as for most of us planning matters are not our profession and we do not spend all day delaing with applications. Residents adjacent to the proposed site were only informed of the application two days ago. The application has been in planning since 22nd November.

I'd still like to know when councillors were first aware of this new application? The new application is very detailed, as I said the process seems to be weighted in favour of the application in that there is little time to object and what time there is falls over a holiday period. Moreover locals have not been alerted, until now- the application was in planning on 22nd November. We also know that there were pre-submission talks between the developer and planning, where it was agreed that the application would be processed more quickly this time round....whatever that means.

Outright denial is a classic human defence. So sorry this happened to you, those ladies ought to be ashamed. I'm sure that that you are simply venting and have no intention of bashing anyone with a stick. There are various areas of dog law under which you would have a case, the problem is the real culprit is the owner and not the dog.

London Mix, actually you are spot on, planning have no interest in the brand of shop and this will have no bearing on their decision on the application. The only objections they will consider and weigh in the balance, are to do with the detail of the application. For these reasons I would urge people to read the application and to comment, having considered its implications.

Chillaxed, Of course I am, but I do not assert that my view is of greater importance, though I will try to argue why it is important.

*Bob* :)

charles26, It is just that you spoke about a personal preference for an M&S, ergo it suits you. The point is that the potential impact of the TOTAL development on those living closest to it weighs in at rather more than a yen for some quality,M&S grub. The development is more than just a shop....

Clearly Dul-witch should have a coven, so if not, please do start one.

James (Barber), When were you first aware of this second application, and on what date did you receive it? The applicants have had as much time as they needed to prpeare this application, so why is there so little apparent time for locals to object and why have those close to the development not been alerted other than by this forum? I'm sure its all in the planning fine print and technically it is all in order...but the process seems weighted in favour of the developer.

charles26, do you live in the street right next to the car wash? Just wondering? Most people in the street affected are aware of cars being badly damaged as well as residential property (garden walls have been knocked down) by delivery vehicles. Again, no objection to M&S it is the overall development which seeks to squeeze much, much more into the same space.

Just to underline, immediately local objections are not to M&S per se. The issue is with the size and footprint of the overall development and the inevitable knock-on effect on parking. There are also concerns about the delivery schedule and frequency. The last application was proposing more deliveries in a smaller space. Delivery vehicles have caused a fair amount of damage over the years to residential property and cars. There are also concerns about noise and there is this processing plant to consider too...what is that? So please... this is about the detail of the overall proposal not M&S.

James get to grips with the detail of the application and the site and you'll see its a bad fit. Anyhow, been through all this once- it's all in the earlier part of the thread. How's Bellenden;)

Actually, just to be clear, it looks like Southwark Planning received the application on 22nd November (the letter by the applicant is dated, 20th Nov) but the application was only scanned in by Southwark on 6th December. And the deadline for objections is 3rd Jan!

Because I can't access all the docs I cannot see if there is detail about vehicle delivery times and schedules, nor for types of delivery vehicle. I do see that opening times for the retail area are 7-10pm, with slightly shorter hours for bank holidays. London Mix, I am sure you can make intelligent comments. Actually having sight of the docs is a bonus!