Revised new - M&S planning application to replace Iceland..

[BrandNewGuy]

fuzzyboots Wrote:

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

> I would be gutted to see Iceland go - and frankly,

> would be forced to use my car to drive more often

> to the nearest LIDL and Aldi. It saves me huge

> amounts on my family food bills in comparison to

> other local supermarkets. Whilst I LOVE M&S food,

> it is but a mere aspiration for me and mine to

> actually be able to afford it.

>

> Or I could stop eating, I suppose.

How much does your car cost a year all told?

[Houseoflego]

Shall we all assume fuzzy boots has their reasons and move on, we are not all two car families you know! Iceland are planning to bring back online shopping in 2013.

[BrandNewGuy]

I'm just asking a perfectly reasonable question about someone who runs a car but has problems affording to feed their family. FWIW, we're a one-car family running a crappy 14-year-old car which, when it's gone kaput, won't be replaced. It's not a personal attack, it's an invitation to question people's "must have a car" assumptions.

[Mick Mac]

Houseoflego Wrote:

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

Iceland are planning to bring back online

> shopping in 2013.

So it won't be "Mums gone to Iceland", it will be a case of "Mum's sitting in front of the laptop again, the lardy cow"

[Ridgley]

Thats is great does this mean they will deliver anywhere or is this still resticted?

[KalamityKel]

This is almost as amusing as reading the comments submitted to the council!

*yawns*

[73jem]

Does anyone know when the council is going to make a decision about this planning application?

[rch]

It wasn't on the agenda of the Sept 11th Planning Sub-Committee meeting (which I attended because there were three items in Village ward). I'll keep my eye out and try to post when it comes up - they usually circulate the agendas the week before the meeting... the next Sub-Committee meeting is on the 2nd Oct and there's another one on the 24th Oct.

[James Barber]

and I've specifically asked council officials when it will be and am awaiting a respones.

[James Barber]

Council officials have told me that they met with the developers, raised a numbers of serious issues (which I believe were identified by residents and ward cllrs) and are awaiting the developer to resubmit their plans taking into account these issues.

On this basis it probably wont go to committee until Nov/Dec at the earliest.

[Mick Mac]

I got an email to say this planning application has been withdrawn. Don't know if that is news to people or not.

Game over.

[fredricketts]

Thank you James, for all the information, that you have provided this site with,

in regards to MS.

And I hope you will continue to do so.

Thank You

Fred Ricketts

[Gidget]

I guess that means they can still re-submit another one.

[civilservant]

Does this mean that the site is going to be vacant after Iceland vacates the store? That is not good news. I would have expected better and more socially responsible management of this whole issue from an outfit like M&S.

[Huguenot]

Eh what?

[alice]

http://www.bestcompanies.co.uk/survey_list.aspx

[James Barber]

M&S were planning on being a tenant of an expanded shop owned and developed by the freeholder.

The freeholder has clearly applied for something that fundamentally was floored - they didnt own all the land or access rights they assumed they did and the flats would have breached H&S laws by requiring occupiers to access via a service yard.

I don;t think M&S can be blamed for such errors.

I also doubt the freeholder will want a shop empty for any period of time and I believe Waitrose would happilly occupy the shop unit as is and I'd be surprised if Iceland wouldnt happily roll on their tenancy if the rent was hiked.

[bil]

so near...yet so far..I was hoping that M&S would be on its way to ED..Thanks for the info.

[civilservant]

Thanks for the clarification, James.

I appreciate that M&S weren't to blame but surprised that they don't seem to have undertaken any due diligence activity on their side.

Noone in ED would want such a prominent site empty for any length of time. I hope that a way can be found to keep it occupied.

[Michael Palaeologus]

It could be that M&S did due diligence, were aware of the issues and decided to go ahead anyway. They now know precisely what the planning committee want and can negotiate with them to reach a compromise.

Alternatively, M&S may have taken a hands off approach and let the freeholder take the risk and the cost of the application. Thus nobody within M&S will get their arses kicked for the rejection and no costs have been incurred to M&S. Its up to the freeholder to sort out, if they want M&S, they will.

Now that the freeholder can see that the likes of Waitrose or M&S want the site, the days of Iceland are numbered. Whatever happens with the planning application and building changes, the rent will go up.

[Mick Mac]

Did he say "Waitrose"?

Expect huge excitement & new thread.

[Serena2012]

A Waitrose is just what Lordship Lane needs. I am still disappointed that the M&S Planning application was unsuccessful but would be delighted if the eyesore that is Iceland was replaced with Waitrose.

[Michael Palaeologus]

The M&S option hasnt gone away. The rejection isnt permanent. They can simply revise their plan and re-submit.

[Louisa]

Hope everyone is now satisfied with this ridiculous outcome. We had the opportunity to attract a major high street name into the area, in a time of recession when many town centres up and down the country suffering badly with empty premises. Be careful what you wish for cos' you just might get, and guess what you have, nothing! So typical of people in ED objecting to anything and everything - and this is the result. Very angry right now.

Louisa.

[the-e-dealer]

Was it rejected or just withdrawn? pretty sensible to withdraw and modify to try and get any sensible/ addressible objections on board. Same thing happened with Harris Boys.