Do try to keep up @starman 
To allow time for appeal, the enforcement notice doesn’t come into effect until April 1st. Then there is one month allowed to actually remove the fence.
And this assumes a lengthy appeals process doesn’t extend that schedule…
Point taken.
To be fair, there’s a lot of different discussion on this topic - here, FB, Twitter, council meetings… Lots of noise too.
I just hope that due process prevails in the end and there’s no foul play from any parties involved.
True. Though in other developments I’ve seen a better understanding of local planning and other issues which might affect the outcome. Erecting a fence which clearly needed planning isnt a good start.
Yes, and unfortunately persons foolish or conniving enough to part with £120k+ without an understanding of local planning may well be foolish or conniving enough to try and carry on further.
And we also have the sunk cost fallacy working against us.
Summary of a meeting with the developer that happened on March 10th:
[removed due to legal threat received from Save Duncombe Hill Green Group]
Thank you Starman, appreciate the help.
Post(s) from this topic were removed as they were off topic
SE23.life aims for transparent moderation. Members are able to view the conversation around this intervention by opting in here.
I share your view. You would think people would want to work together on this. So sad.
I went past this morning and the fence on the corner of duncombe hill is coming down, though I think being replaced with a lower height fence.
Is it my imagination or is there a post and guide line in the middle of the plot? Perhaps to still enclose the trees?
Just been past again - will take a photo on my way home, but basically they have reduced the corner height of the fence where Brockley Rise and Duncombe Hill meet, but move the high bit back inside so it is still all effectively fenced off with a high fence and just one corner now has a lower fence, in front of a higher fence that is more set back from the road.
I knew it!
I’m not entirely sure this follows the direction of the enforcement notice. It will be interesting to see the council’s view on this change.
I do wonder if the developers are reacting in kind at this point to some of the more aggressive campaigners.
I’m hoping when everyone’s calmed down a constructive compromise can be reached.
What do you mean aggressive? Let’s not forget the developers erected a 2m fence without seeking planning permission and have subsequently been ordered to remove it by the Council. This is not their first ride at the rodeo and they will have done so with the full knowledge planning permission was required. They are now appealing on the basis they must protect the trees which have been been healthy and thriving for many years without a 2m fence.
Oh I quite agree, the fence should go.
I just think there’s been a fair amount of anger and name calling, and I’m not sure that’s always the best approach to a positive outcome.
Sure. Any campaign will work better if they don’t react to external provocation. But I just don’t see the Developer’s actions today as a reaction to some aggression. In their meeting with a few select campaigners they were reported to have little interest in the safety issues created by the fence. Such as the drug dealing in the newly created alley way.
I’d suggest the Developers, at this stage, are showing little interest in the community’s concerns. Do you think otherwise?
Here you go - not sure why the developers are acting like this and it’s more work for them also. Bizarre. I wondered if there was some clause that if something was fenced off and hidden from view for a certain amount of time it would lose it’s status as a public space etc. Strange otherwise.
I think if I were a developer, I’d be more up for seeking a constructive solution if I had been approached in a constructive fashion.
Mostly the campaign and local action has been very positive, I just feel that if you start publicly calling people idiots they are much less inclined to do what you want them to do.
