Zak

I noticed today that the caf? in the Leisure Centre has gone all healthy and has started stocking a range of very nice looking food from an outfit called CRUSSH. Unlike the previous fare, it may be difficult to resist. Has anyone tried it?

Yes, we've also been told by the Southwark Clinical Commissioning Group that they have told the surgery to "retract" the notice, which they've given to patients who are outside their practice boundary. This of course should result in their writing round to everyone affected and informing them of the new position. However we've had no communication from them and I imagine that's the case for everyone else. Call me a cynic, but if they were to drag their feet for long enough, then they'd probably get the result they want - which is that people will find themselves a new doctor, thinking that they've only got a month to do so before they're left without a GP. We await their letter!

I've just spoken to a primary care commissioning manager at Southwark Clinical Commissioning Group ( 020 7525 9888) and she's going to get in touch with the practice to ascertain exactly what's happening. If you're affected, then do get in touch with the CCG and flag up your concerns about the way the practice has behaved.

We've just had a letter from the Forest Hill Group Practice to say that because we now live outside the new(?) boundaries within which the practice operates, we can no longer be one of their patients and must find another doctor. A bit of a shock after 30 years! There's been no prior warning of this and we've got 4 weeks to find another doctor, before they send our records to the health authority. Had we been away when the letter arrived, it might have only amounted to two or three weeks! Based on a bit of research, as far as I can see if you decide to move outside of their boundary then they can do this to you without any warning, but I'm not sure they can do it without warning if you haven't actually moved. In most other circumstances GPs are required to provide prior notification of what they intend to do. Has this happened to anyone else? Does anyone know if they are following NHS Procedures correctly? Zak

I understand that Plastic Free Dulwich are organising another street clean at 11.30am on 11th November - meet-up at Rye Books on Northcross Road, in order to take part. You can find out more about the Dulwich Plastic Free Initiative eight posts above, from the guy behind it - Ric Baldock. ric.baldock@gmail.com

How about taking the train from East Dulwich Station to Streatham (9 minutes) and then getting a 118 bus from Streatham High Road(opposite the ice rink),which stops pretty much outside the ground (approx.30 mins.) Why aren't there any directions on the club website? very strange..............

In case anyone is thinking of snapping up one of the new flats going up next to ED station, take a look at the attached picture. From the outside it looks like they are properly built with bricks - as you might expect. But in fact the visible brickwork is simply a "brick skin", somehow attached to the exterior cladding which encases the building. What you see here is the damage caused by a lorry which brushed the side of the building. They look quite smart, but don't be fooled!

It seems that Colour Makes People Happy has decamped to somewhere in Sussex. Meantime, the shop has been bought by someone who is understood to want to use it to promote creative enterprises of one sort or another. It's currently hosting a very talented artist, as part of the Dulwich Festival - worth going along to see. Next door is no longer Clothes For Causes, but is being run by a couple of guys who are doing great things with up-cycling furniture - at very reasonable prices. Zak

Looks like the shop on Grove Vale has closed. It seemed to open very erratically. Did it make anyone happy?

James, Despite your protestations about the cost of postage and needing email addresses, the bottom line is that it seems as if you've used your "opinion poll" as a exercise to harvest data regarding people's political preferences ahead of the forthcoming election, which seems completely inappropriate. What's more why exactly do you need to carry out on online opinion poll, when there's already a proper consultation procedure at the disposal of the council. A cynic, would say that you just want to try and find out which side to back!

?125 each year for a permit..........and doubtless rising! ?49 for 10 vouchers for visitors @ c?5 a throw ...........do pop over to see us! More permits issued than available parking spaces ...........don't imagine that you're guaranteed a space! It feels very much like a form of additional local taxation. So....... NO to a CPZ!!

I wonder how many people remember seeing Peter Crouch playing for Dulwich Hamlet. Yes, it's true! It was in 2000. Dulwich had a centre forward who interested Spurs and in order to secure his services, they offered a pre-season friendly( I believe) and lent us Peter Crouch for 6 games. At that point he'd not broken into the Spurs 1st team and as I remember, it looked like he never would! He loped around the opposition's box for 6 games and scored one goal. But how wrong I was! Oh yes......our centre forward - pretty much never heard of again. Zac

Just found their website https://www.labonnebouffe.co.uk/

It seems that the restaurant located in the old Pretty's caf? will be opening shortly. We bumped into the head chef yesterday, as they were in the process of stocking up, and he told us that it's opening on 12th January. It looks like they've spent quite a bit on fitting it out and from peering in through the door it looks promising. I can't remember what it's called - can anyone help with that?

We had two gold fish living happily in our garden pond, but sadly one has suddenly died. Is there anyone out there with a fish that they'd like to have rehomed? It's a nice pond with a net to protect the fish from herons and any other predators. They get very well fed. Our fish would be doubtless delighted if a new mate were suddenly to arrive. Let us know if you have a surplus fish! Zak

Yes, this is really good news - a lovely piece of East Dulwich saved from cynical redevelopment.

I rang the Planning Inspectorate today and discovered that they have received over 100 objections/comments via their portal - which must be pretty good going! In addition, there will be further representations that were sent to them by post. Let's hope they take notice!

I've just been re-reading the Developer's case to the Planning Inspectorate and came across the following claim: "2-3 Railway Rise are currently tired in appearance and in need of some repair and refurbishment in their current unattractive state they have a neutral or negative contribution to the street scene and the design quality of the area...." (p13 of his submission) How could anyone take that view - other than the developer. It's patently untrue and he shouldn't be allowed to get away with it! If you haven't already objected, then don't leave it to other people - there's still another day, and a bit, to go. The Planning Inspectorate in Bristol really shouldn't be misled in this way! You can simply email your objection to: ct2@pins.gsi.gov.uk with the case reference number 3135088 & make it FAO of Hazel Stanmore-Richards, the case officer Or go via the Inspectorate's on-line portal https://acp.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/ViewCase.aspx?caseid=3135088

Just in case anyone is planning to submit an objection tomorrow via the Planning Inspectorate Portal, sometime between 8am-8pm, you need to know that they're closing it down for maintenance during that period However, I've spoken to someone at the PI and apparently you can email the case officer directly as an alternative. The email address is ct2@pins.gsi.gov.uk They also told me that people should include in the header line of the email her name: FAO Hazel Stanmore-Richards and the case reference number 3135088

I've checked with the Planning Inspectorate today and everyone has right up until the end of Sunday 17th January (11.59pm!) to submit their objections via the on-line portal. This link takes you straight to the page: just click the blue button on the top right that says MAKE REPRESENTATION and start by filling in your details, clicking Save & Continue as you go along. https://acp.planningportal.gov.uk/ViewCase.aspx?caseid=3135088 If you're writing in by post, then of course it will need to arrive by Saturday.

Good point First Mate, I think that there are perhaps five points that can be made in putting forward an objection, which are all drawn from to the reasons that Southwark refused planning permission in the first place. 1. The proposed building itself is unacceptable. "Due to its inappropriate height, scale, massing, siting and design, the proposal, following the demolition of the existing cottages, would appear as excessively dominant and incongruous in this location" It's a totally inappropriate building to erect in that space. 2. The way it doesn't fit in with the rest of the area "would harm the character and appearance of the townscape". It's a brutal three storey block and clashes with the harmony of the remaining building, which is typical of the domestic architecture of East Dulwich. It's worth knowing that the developer has got his consultant to highlight all the three story buildings in the area to make the case that it's really fine! He's even trying to pass off the shops along Grove Vale as three storeys, because although they're only two storeys, they've got mansard windows in the roof. 3. It's impact on the remaining cottage next door "Due to its size, bulk and siting in relation to the windows and the garden area at no. 1 Railway Rise, the proposal would be overbearing upon and would result in a significant loss of outlook for the occupiers of this property". 4. It provides poor accommodation for prospective occupiers "The first and second floor residential units would not include adequate areas of private amenity space and the proposal would therefore fail to provide a satisfactory living environment for future occupiers" 5. These are important historical railway cottages built for employees of the London, Brighton & South Coast Railway in the 1860s and in any case shouldn't be demolished The group of three cottages are of great historic value. On the 1868 OS map, it can be seen that they that they predate pretty much everything in the area, except for some houses along Grove Vale. The original entrance to the station was at the end of Railway Rise (where the builders? merchant is now situated). No 1 was the station master?s house and the two that the developer wants to knock down were for other station employees. As a group of buildings they?re a great bit of old East Dulwich and it would be terrible if two of them were swept away. I hope this is helpful. The attached poster shows the new development alongside No. 1 and gives Southwark's chapter & verse for refusing points 1&2 in case anyone wants to know Just go to https://acp.planningportal.gov.uk/ Quoting Reference: 3135088 and get objecting! The deadline for objections is 17th January

An ad hoc group has been set up (inc.No1) in order to alert people to/publicise the opportunity to object to the developer's appeal against Southwark's decision to refuse planning permission to knock down Nos. 2 & 3 Railway Rise and replace them with a horrible three storey building which (in Southwark's own words), would be "incongruous in this location and would harm the character and appearance of the townscape". Everyone has until Sunday 17th January to send in their comments to the Planning Inspectorate in Bristol. The easiest way to do this is on line. Go onto the Planning Inspectorate Site https://acp.planningportal.gov.uk / and then enter the seven figure reference number 3135088 into the search box, in order to bring up the Railway Rise application. Then comment! Attached is a flyer with a picture of what is being proposed, plus all the information. If you feel strongly enough about the issue, then print it out and hand it around. These are some of the oldest houses in East Dulwich (c1860)and it would be terrible to see two of them torn down in this way.

I'm not sure if, among all these posts, there's an accessible image of what the developer is actually proposing to build in place of Nos. 2&3. If you've not yet seen it, then take a look. It's about as bad as it could be and really needs kicking out. Object!

I also think that Borderland's idea is excellent. If you look at the developer's latest submission, you'll see that they do everything possible to make it seem like their proposals are entirely in keeping with the surrounding area. If you can't find these easily from the above links, then PM me and I'll send you the PDFs in question. If you are planning to submit further comments/an objection, then you need to bear in mind the exact reasons which Southwark gave for rejecting the original application (see below). They gave three reasons. The first of these, which relates to the impact of the proposed development on the surrounding area, is perhaps most the relevant in this context (the other two, relate to the impact of the scheme on the adjacent property). Objections will carry most weight if they relate to these issues, which in turn relate to the Southwark's own plans etc Extract From Southwark's Published Refusal To Grant Planning Permission For Proposed Railway Rise Development ?Reasons for refusal: 1 Due to its inappropriate height, scale, massing, siting and design, the proposal, following the demolition of the existing cottages, would appear as excessively dominant and incongruous in this location and would harm the character and appearance of the townscape. The proposal is therefore contrary to saved policies 3.12 (Quality in Design) and 3.13 (Urban Design) of the Southwark Plan (2007), policy SP12 (Design and Conservation) of the LB Southwark Core Strategy 2011 and Section 7 (Requiring Good Design) of the National Planning Policy Framework 2012". Applicant: Mr Bateman St Aidans Group LBS Registered Number: 15/AP/0192 Date of Issue of this decision: 25/03/2015 Zak

I've just had a look at the Kickstarter page and I see that over ?8,500 has now been raised out of the ?13,500 that the project needs (including my small contribution, made after I watched the interview and pitch video. That's pretty fantastic, but the only problem is that according to the Kickstarter site, the remaining ?5,000 has to be raised by midnight on Thursday or it's all been in vain. Anyone else feel as I do that we should be supporting a local talent who is in his turn supporting the local community? https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/2132164114/the-works-short-film/description is the place to go if you agree.