first mate

When he's all grown-up he'll understand. Hope that the 'party' has now been turned off.

davidh, for the umpteenth time, it's not about the BRAND of shop, it's the size and suitability of the proposal for the current plot. Have you actually read the planning application?

E-dealer, Thanks, I'll look into that.

Robin, Again, thank you. It does not sound like a level playing field where a large organisation like M&S can call on a raft of experts to wade through and interpret these complexities to suit their ends, whereas most residents are not experts in planning law and process and do not have financial resources to mount detailed expertise/objections. Additionally, the consultation period was brief, in so far as many of us residents came to hear about the proposals. As you know, many of us living close to the site were not consulted at all. As others have suggested, a major proposal which is likely to have significant impact on those living closest to it, seems to have been pushed through on the quiet. Complexities of process appear to work very much in favour of the applicant. Thank you for the heads up about the meeting, we will watch out for news of that.

I can see how this would cause difficulties for residents on Lordship Lane. Obviously the same issues apply to Chesterfield Grove plus this is a narrow residential street, totally unsuited for delivery by the enormous vehicles that are used. Overall this just seems to be the wrong site for the scale of the proposal.

Robin, Thank you for your reply. A number of us feel somewhat alarmed that this process appears to be going on behind closed doors- though I am sure that it can be justified in council-speak. Nonetheless, given the strength of local feeling would it not be a good idea to push harder to get this to Community Council? I assume that an 'early' decision can only mean the application is rejected since any modifications to the existing application would have to be made public? I cannot imagine that the application in its current form could be okayed, in part because of the volume of detailed objections and because a very similar proposal was rejected some years ago. I will look at the link you have given. I think that residents on the roads closeset to the site in question need help fighting their corner. I am sure you will have seen the link to the photographs of the Iceland lorry trying to get out of the existing entrance, earlier in this thread- these photos say it all. The notion of reducing space but stepping up deliveries is clearly bonkers and casts doubt on the care with which the application has been developed- or they simply don't care about any negative impact on locals.

With clapping on cue.

Not just any planning application..... Yes, James Barber has suggested a range of modifications in his letter to planning. He proposes early morning deliveries on Lordship Lane.

And what do your waters tell you about M&S?

Never trust a gambling man. Only ?10...pah. What sort of dealer are you? Anyhow, I just want an update on the M&S application...... wonder if James the Barber knows?

Yep, I'm looking forward to getting that late license at the GE too ;)

This is done primarily to salve the fragile egos of politicians. Pass the bucket.

Completely unsuitable. If people want to party into the early hours then go into town. It is simply not reasonable to open so late on a residential street.

I wonder if any councillors can comment on the present state of play with the application? I have looked on the application site but cannot see anything and yet I hear rumours (and granted, they are only rumours) that M&S are due to move in the autumn? It is notable at a glance at the site that those writing in in favour are doing so from Dulwich Village and places like Therapia Road, these supporting letters are very brief and make statements along the lines of- yay, we'd love to shop at a local M&S,.. But most do not comment on the application itself other than to say parking won't be an issue because those individuals will not use there cars, or simply that it won't be an issue because they say so. Can those kind of replies really be used as support for the application???!!! Almost without exception, those writing in against are from the roads around the proposed application site and these replies are incredibly detailed, taking the application to task on numerous issues, not least alleged contravention of planning guidelines. One excellent reply also shows how ill suited even the current Iceland lorries are to deliver on Chesterfield Grove. On another note the cars are queueing up at the car wash and, gain, blocking pedestrian access on the path, requiring pedestrians to walk around cars into the road to get by. Unacceptable for the elderly and infirm and for mothers with kids. Have any councillors monitored the behaviour of the carwash (and their "good friends" in Southwark parking ;))?

As Strawbs said this was a young, black male. Those are the facts, I see no problem with stating the facts. I hope that the important people in all of this- Strawbs and her family- are okay. A horrible experience.

qotsa79, more than anything else the current application would in practice work at the expense of local residents.

Truly disgusting- if this is what major political parties are getting up to, imagine what everyone else is doing.

A dog that howls for hours at a time is most definitely not fine- it is akin to a person shouting 'help,help' for hours at a time. Some dogs can suffer very badly from separation anxiety and simply cannot cope when their owners go off to work for the day. It could be that the owners are not aware. The dog is probably inside the house- howling is a sound that carries easily. The only other thought is that if this is an intact male dog it could be that there is a bitch in season. Male dogs can get incredibly worked up at any whiff of scent nearby (the scent of an in-season bitch carries for 5 miles)and howling is then a signal of frustration. If this is the case, once the season is oveer the howling will stop.

If anyone has any interest, beyond their 'preferred' brand, in the detail of the application and its potential impact on our community please see this link http://planningonline.southwark.gov.uk/DocsOnline/Documents/230437_1.pdf These are the detailed objections of a local resident and RIBA architect. In particular, note a series of photographs from p.6 on which show the impact of delivery lorries and how badly matched they are for a residential street. The author of this detailed objection also notes that a very similar application was turned down by planning a few years ago, arguably setting a precedent.

I think I am correct in saying that the brand of the shop will have little if any bearing on the planning application- it is the fine detail of the application and what each proposer brings to the table in terms of the building and issues of parking that are of any significance. It is whether the shop wants to expand the existing building imprint, what they actually want to do with the structure of the building that will have any bearing on planning decisions.

Neilson 99 said Get's my vote too. If you don't want shops and are worried about parking spaces, then don't live near Lordship Lane. It's quite simple. Same as those people who buy a house near a pub and then complain about noise and people drinking. Yes, but suppose some planners come along with a proposal not only to change the brewery but to enlarge the footprint of that pub and build 8 new flats on top of it and extend the licensing hours so that it can now open into the early hours. Those living close to the pub are understandably concerned, but those further away can only focus on the fact that the new bewery will be selling guzzlegut5x and some of their other fave beers. Do you see the difference?

davidh, How does informed objection to the detail of a planning application make kk a 'flat-earther'? As underlined by kk, the objection is not to M&S per se but to the total planning application and the impact this will have on those living closest to it.

KK, Bang on.

bemusED, but in many other ways fazer71 has seen the light, in that the application really does present an attempt to 'maximise' use of space in a way that is highly detrimental to those immediately around it. That the application also attempts to trade on eco-friendly credentials is derisable.

But it is not just about M&S, it is the whole application package that needs to be considered.