first mate

I am not aware of MG as an accident hotspot at all. It does seem an utter waste of resources. To what extent is the path to be widened? By hook or by crook the aim is to close this road off to traffic and the latest excuse is that peopel with buggies cannot get by. I cannot help but note Councillor Barber's comment that any path widening is to aid people walking with buggies. There is no mention of the elderly or disabled. For me this indicates whose interests are paramount for our local rep. Survival of the fittest and loudest.

Oh well, too late now, it's a done deal but shows what developers are getting away with....I always thought the 'green roof' was another bit of window dressing, the drawings showed something akin to the Horniman green roof. Turns out it's just two tiny planted beds.

Ah so two tiny squares of planting. Is that the extent of the so called green roof that was promised....interesting.

London Mix, I totally agree with you. This is not about strict liability but building control, having made numerous site visits must even in a minir way be held accountable..if only to finally indicate that stuff was deliberately hidden from them etc.. I have heard takes from builders working on large projects in ED that certain building control officers can allegedly be 'persuaded' to pass stuff that is not to standard. Obviously this may be oure baloney.

DF! Their words, not mine!

Looks like the Penthouses are going up on a fourth floor and that'll set a nice precedent for something as high over the road at Londis. I've lost track of where things are at re social housing quotas and whether the two floors of "offices" have yet been given permission to be flats? Remembering that the orginal applications were passed on the basis that we desperately need more flats and there is no demand for offices. But they then changed the submission from flats back to offices in order to greedily claim a new fourth floor for two penthouses - no doubt filling a much needed gap in the housing market ( the building was always 3 storeys before). I may be wrong but it could be once exterior build, internal plumbing and electrics are all finished the M&S below can open as they work on internal decorating and carpentry above?

buddug, Thanks for updating the forum and look forward to hearing more. Those poor people need someone fighting their corner. How odd that Southwark would claim another council has signed off major building work that falls within Southwark...how does this fit with Councillor Hamvas's assertion that Southwark have done everything by the book? Of course this may be true but I am intersted to know how the system works in this respect...do councils now share planning resources?

I guess it depends what time deliveries stop, that is the real issue and, as discussed, the delivery vehicles are huge and they do make a lot of noise, the beeping is really intrusive and because the service area is so small the whole process takes longer than it might each time. Not to mention all the clattering and banging that accompanies each delivery as stuff is unloaded. The delivery schedule is going to be greater than it was for Iceland anyway. I am not clear if a stop has been put on delivery and unloading times. I just don't see why some people assume that because you live close to a street with shops on it that it is a given that those shops can open for 24 hours should they choose and those close by should simply suck it up. Why does consumerism take precedence? Whatever happened to the notion of balance? Surely 7am to 10pm is enough time for most people to do their shopping?

I have not seen delivery vehicles of anywhere near the same size servicing Londis, nor do those vehicles have to move slowly in and out of a delivery bay beeping as they go. Why do you feel opening hours of 7 am to 10 pm need to be extended and why does this take precedence over the needs of residents close by? Just saying another shop is open longer is not much of an argument either.

Cedges it is as busy as you want to make it. The existing opening and closing times are perfectly reasonable and give ample time for those who wish to shop as well as time for residents close by to get some respite and sleep. Why do you feel it is necessary for the shop to be open later than the times agreed with planning?

Me too.

No I don't believe they can. Deliveries are very noisy in this instance to have them any time if the day or night would be too disruptive hence conditions in planning agreement.

Yes one is fne but what if one becomes many? Either everyone can do it or not?

M&S originally wanted to significantly increase opening/closing and delivery hours beyond those of the former incumbent Iceland. This would have resulted in disruption to locals as the delivery area is smaller than ever and the very large delivery vehicles not only block the street holding up traffic but also make a terrific racket as they inch into the delivery bay, beeping as they go. Part of the earlier planning agreement had M&S operating at similar times to Iceland. The fear was/ is that M&S will use the alcohol licence to impose the extended trading hours they originally wanted and that were rejected in earlier planning applications.

Is that the same St Aiden's involved with the whole Solomon's Passage fiasco?

James, no traffic feasibility study will give a true picture of pressures on this area until all the new schools and M&S are up and running, but you probably know that, hence the haste to drive this through now. When will those roads adjacent to MG get an info pack and get their say?

Saffron, or when someone's car was parked you told the owner their wheels needed fixing and then when they were out if sight you removed the wheels putting only three back, telling the unwitting owner on their return that they now owed you money....or else. Isn't that extortion as well? Three crimes then?

James, what are the key conclusions? Can you provide a link to the report and put it in here?

Charlie, thanks for the reply. I think the concern would be that since closing hours will now be in excess of what I believe was agreed, will this also mean that delivery hours are extended beyond what was agreed?

Doesn't this constitute some sort of trespass and criminal damage to property? Signalto that is awful, I feel very sorry for you.

Yes please report to police with fullest description of dogs and owner possible. BTW, just so you know and can tell the police, since they are not always clued up themselves, whoever was handling the dogs at the time is culpaable in law because they have care and responsibility of the animals at that moment. Both that person/s and the actual owner can be prosecuted. I do so hope the police follow up on this.

Charlie, Oh, so they are going to be selling alcohol after all. I recall someone asking about this months ago and being advised alcohol would not be sold. How will this now affect the opening and operating hours..especially at weekends, will these be extended beyond what was agreed in the earlier application? Does this mean M&S can stay open 8 am until 12 pm every day if the week, including weekends?

Chazzle, that appears to be a familiar pattern and one S'wark planning shoukd be taken to task on, whether accidental incompetence or no.

Perhaps Renata should go straight to S'wark building control and dig out all the records on this build, surely the simplest way to find out what was and what was not signed off? If I have understood, the Councillor has known about this major issue for at least two months. I am not sure why it was necessary to repeat the fact that some residents 'might' be using this as an opportunity to upgrade- a bit of a red herring that.