Jump to content

Recommended Posts

true Keef and it would be different if it was a builders yard, firing range, chemical storage facility etc etc but it's not. It's warehouse that's supporting small individual businesses and seems to be wanted by the majority however I understand the residents of that street are worried because of the uncertainty of what it will bring them. I'm all for raising objections to anything unwanted and that's what's been done and we'll see if those who make decisions act on those. I think it's a shame that people want it closed before it's opened as it's such a good idea.


And before you ask, no I don't live on Zenoria Street.

"It's warehouse that's supporting small individual businesses and seems to be wanted by the majority"


Again, me included, but isn't that a touch hyprcritical of us... Fair enough, a builders yard, firing range, chemical storage facility would have it's own issues, but surely if a similar scenario occurs on another street, and it's any other retail outlet thats opening, chain or not, we should all be responding in the same manner that we have here.

wasn't the new outdoors section of the Plough done sans planning permission. That must cause the local houses grief (lighting, music, people etc) but I've not heard much complaints about it


As I say I do have some sympathy with the residents and applaud Keef for being fair-minded. But in this instance alone, judging by what we know (the location, the nature of the business, the entrances, the previous occupant of same site etc) it doesn't seem to be THAT much of a change

Keef Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> but surely if a similar scenario occurs on another street ... we should all be responding in the same manner that we have here.


perhaps yes, if something wants to open that the majority of the locals want, and it would be beneficial to the people in the area then it should be looked at favourably. Unless it's in my backyard of course then there no way Jos? that that thing is happening near me ;-)

I think the EDWH is a great idea. If, however, it opened on my road, which is 100% residential (apart from those working from home) I'd be well peeved if residents hadn't been properly consulted first. Hypothetically, if I lived on Zenoria St I'd still feel the same way if I hadn't had proper prior consultation. BUT I wouldn't be THAT surprised given the proximity to LL and the fact that there are two large retail ops on the corner plus a Warehouse. You'd kind of expect a bit of a problem there when considering to buy or rent, wouldn't you? As an aside, I'm sure they already get regular traffic from after hours EDT'ers looking for somewhere to shed excess alcohol!

I guess it comes down to the planning issue, and whether it is classified as A1 or not. If it is, then I dont think it needs change of use permission (am no expert - so dont hold me to this - but I looked on internet and saw that only need change of use if you move between categories). Would seeem strange to me for someone to take on this warehouse project, and the associated cost, unless they had first worked out the building designation with the council, but maybe it has hapened.

Either way, I hope it is allowed and will definitely visit it if it is - from my perspective it is better than an empty warehouse (I dont live on the street).

Can I help by clarifying a couple of things?


Firstly I dont think it's been shown that ED Warehouse is opening without the correct permissions in place; it may well be that while it has been empty or in use as storage it has all the time been coded A1 for retail use.


Secondly planning permission does not exist simply to protect residents from retailers; its function is to ensure that developments fit in with local, regional, and national strategy. It's not a boo/hurray system.


Thirdly, the Warehouse will either be a worthwhile addition and enjoy customer support; or it won't, and it won't.


Hope that helps


Ultraconsultancy


[sorry dusty i hadn't seen yours while i was posting - you are quite right of course

Keef Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I do feel for the residents a bit here. They're

> basically getting no support because everyone is

> so excited about this new warehouse (me included I

> must admit). Just can't help thinking things would

> be different if it was something like... say...

> Foxtons.


Keef, I'm with you on this.

What is the real substance of the Zenorians (I like that too) objection? The site is adjacent to LL so v. unlikely to increase foot traffic on the street, parking is already disastrous (as it is on every street off LL between Goose Green and the police station) so can't really get worse, would seem unlikely to be particularly noisy/smelly etc. How is this particular development likely to change the character of the street? It's also worth bearing in mind that even if the planning issue is resolved in favour of the warehouse that doesn't mean they are not liable to further control if, for example, it leads to particular problems with regard to litter or some other identifiable nuisance.


Is it possible that it's a load of knee-jerk nimby b*ll*cks?

Some well chosen words there, Dave.


The structural and fitting work must, understandably, have been a grind for the Zenorians.


But I'm sure that once it's up and running everyone will get along famously, and that little corner of ED will grow to love its cheese shop and its book dealer!


Now can we get back to the business of being rude about Foxtons?


Ultraconsultancy

That's the first time I've read the word "nimby" on this entire thread


While I sympathise with the zenorian residents for the increased noise over the past couple of months, I expect it'll quieten down once the place is open.


I doubt very much (although I admittedly have no idea) that it'll be open particularly late or early, and is unlikely to open every day of the week (indy retailers are often are one man bands and have to re-stock at some point)


I personally can't wait until it opens!

nice idea the rent on it was 60,000k per year when a mate of mine looked into it to use as a small local theatre /cinema unfortunately it proved unfeasble both in the planning sense and the cost

i guess charging people about 400 pounds a month will be a nice little earner for someone

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> >

> Stop playing with my dreams Mark

>

> Between where I work (variously Blackfriars, Lower

> Thames St and Tower Hill) and where I live there

> is no-where to buy cds/DVDs.

>

> There used to be an MVC on London Bridge but

> that's now a Pret. Speci--alist* CD shops exist in

> Peckham, Walworth Rd etc and "chart" music in

> Woolies etc but if I want to buy the new (say)

> Edwyn Collins album I'm stuffed...

>

> *That word again



You'll have to end up buying vinyl on-line......

all business is risk and hard work !

but the maths still tell me its a good idea as long as the stalls are filled ..i will watch with interest lordship lane is not as busy as some assume during the weekdays .

and i think the zenoria street residents have a point ....just beacuse they already have parking problems why should they accept more .

I have some sympathy for the residents of Zenoria street if things have not been all above board....but not that much sympathy because, as Mark said, you don't have to walk past any residences to get into the Warehouse and as has been pointed out Lordship Lane on a weekday is not as busy as some seem to assume - neither, for that matter, is it all that busy on a Sunday. Saturday on the Strip has ever been busy - residents on streets adjacent to the Strip just have to lump it I suppose. Someone recently moaned about Church services being noisey on a Sunday and spoiling a lay-in....hmmmmm.


The thing we ought to be concerned about is whether the pressure on on-road parking caused by the Warehouse and other developments starts to make a Controlled Parking Zone a possibility.

If we did have to have a controlled parking zone, would it not be possible to have something that would allow, say, an hour of free parking rather than all out pay and displays for the shoppers/visitors? It seems unlikely that we will escape the situation for very much longer and surely it would be better to get the sort of parking regulations that would best suit the local people and businesses. This would also have an interesting effect on the Foxtons fleet... (Apologies for going off topic)

We live near the butcher's/ new gym so it's a similar problem with parking etc. However the benefit of a great butcher on my doorstep far outweigh the negatives of my street being a car park on a saturday.


By the way, is this a Zenorian?


http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/39995000/jpg/_39995169_sontaran_bbc_story203.jpg

Yes, Popped along with Mrs Plot today and came back with a selection of cheese, and two books, so in all a good day out in my estimation. Also saw CitizenEd in is role as "Transporter of Children."


Oyster Bar though.....Only for the more upwardly mobile...Surely not the sort of place that likes of Mockney Et Al woudl frequent?

Ha ha, spotted I guess. Oysters were just wonderful, got myself a shucker and some takeouts too. Mrs mockers got a book and I reckon the place is a big brucey bonus to the area. Well done UC and gang.

I too bumped into "the transporter" and his secret elixir of youth!!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...