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

[LondonMix]

Do you know what will happen to the shop? Hopefully it won't be left vacant.

[Sue]

That's really sad.

The last time I was in there I had extraordinarily good and cheery service from the person on the till. It made a really pleasant change. She was just being lovely to everybody.

And they recently had a notice in their window thanking everybody for their enquiries and concern and saying they didn't yet know what was happening.

Unlike the charming i*rate, I don't think the shop is ghastly at all, and I will miss it.

ETA: And to say "hurray" when people have been told just before Christmas that they are losing their jobs on 4 January, when in the present climate they will find it extremely hard to find employment, just beggars belief.

[StraferJack]

Sue - I think i*rate was being sarcastic and berating the iceland knockers

[Michael Palaeologus]

As a result of this thread I have started going to Iceland.

I quite like it :s

[Sue]

StraferJack Wrote:

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

> Sue - I think i*rate was being sarcastic and

> berating the iceland knockers

xxxxxx

Oh dear, sorry i*rate!! BLUSH :(

So does that mean it isn't true that it's closing?

[LondonMix]

i-rate, when you say they will lose their jobs "there" did they indicate they were being given the opportunity to transfer to other stores? It is sad. Hopefully, whatever becomes of the shop will generate at least equivalent new employment.

[James Barber]

The freeholders has reapplied for planning permission 12-AP-3773:

http://planningonline.southwark.gov.uk/AcolNetCGI.exe?ACTION=UNWRAP&RIPNAME=Root.PgeDocs&TheSystemkey=9547620

If you are for or against (and you'll need to give reasons acceptable in planning terms) contact the case officers - [email protected]

Please do copy me as a ward councillors any email or support or objection so we can be clear local views.

[macrobana]

35 FTE employees.

[AbDabs]

James - is there any summary of the changes from the previous application? I notice that the consultation period ends on 3rd January, which suggests they've tried to sneak this through while we're all rushing around with Christmas shopping/socialising/increased workload/holidays.

A quick look at the drawings and the issues that caused us concern don't appear to have changed at all.

[first mate]

Wow, that was quick...First I've heard of this. Consuktation ends 3rd January?? That doesn't give much time for objections. Again, the level playing field argument. Those behind the applications have the money, time and muscle to work on the application 100% We locals do not have that luxury. Yes, it sounds like they are trying to sneak it through. This is going to upset people.

Having had a quick look the footprint of this new application looks even larger than the last. They are suggesting removal of existing bollards at the entrance to increase room for the delivery vehicles- those bollards were pu in to protect private property from damage by delivery vehicles.

It is really cynical to present this application in the run up to Christmas, the developers know that significant time and energy of locals is necessary to mount objections. I note that "pre-application discussions" were underway with the council for this second application back in the summer, so the council knew this proposal was on its way. Why have none of us heard of it until now?

[LondonMix]

At work so haven't had a chance to read it. Have they made any ammendments? If not, how have they addressed the issues raised that caused the application to be withdrawn in the first place? (Apologies for being lazy)

[first mate]

Locals need to move fast and I hope the architect who made the last detailed set of objections might be prepared to do so again. Presumbaly councillors who have anything to do with the planning side of things would have been aware of this application some time back?

[LondonMix]

The date on the document is today so why do you think the cllrs knew about it?

[Siduhe]

On a very brief review, this doesn't look like it obviously/substantively addresses the objections re parking, access and deliveries, other than producing further reports (parking survey and delivery vehicle planning) to support the revised proposal. Can't see how they have resolved the right of way issue either, but assume that must be in there somewhere.

[first mate]

I thought the date applicatioin was received by planning was 6/12.

Anyhow, it says there was a 'pre-application meeting' between the developer and planning in July where promises were sought that this time round the application would be processed more 'expeditiously', last time people were off on maternity leave and so forth. Not implying something wrong in this, but it is some indication that people in planning knew the application was probably on its way and some councillors are much more involved with planning than others.

[first mate]

Sidhue,

It definitely needs someone with planning knowledge to read it and that is why I hope the architect who raised many of the detailed (and valid) objections last time sees this sooner rather than later.

I have had some difficulty accessing a number of the documents and keep getting a message that there is insufficient data to read it- so get a blank page. Don't know if this is my computer or a problem with the site. Would like to hear from others, since if there is a problem with the site that would stop interested parties from accessing key info.

[LondonMix]

I see, I was just curious. I think the planning dept is totally different to the cllrs and I don't think they get any specific heads up but I could be wrong on that. Robin as one of your passions is planning, it would be helpful if you chimed in. Also, I have beena able to access the docs okay-- printed them out but won't be able to read in detail until later and frankly don't know enough to comment intelligently anyhow!

[alosinom67]

Yes indeed Cora I totally agree. Iceland is the only shop in East Dulwich that the middle classes turn their noses up at but it supplies cheap staples that you wouldn't find in supermarkets such as Sainsburys and Co-op. These silly "Local" stores with their 25% price increases only serve to duplicate all other high streets in the country. What happened to individuality?

[Siduhe]

first mate, that's an known issue with adobe - could have been avoided in the upload but I have the same. Reduce the size of the doc on your screen from 104% to about 70% and you should be able to read it. Completely agree re getting a planning specialist to look at it. The transport statement (esp Part 2 of 4) seems particularly relevant. This concludes there will be reduced parking demand at the site and in surrounding areas with the new store, because of the removal of the office space above Iceland. However I don't see any information to support the conclusion that people using the offices are currently driving into ED, so I don't quite understand how that conclusion has been reached.

[first mate]

Because I can't access all the docs I cannot see if there is detail about vehicle delivery times and schedules, nor for types of delivery vehicle. I do see that opening times for the retail area are 7-10pm, with slightly shorter hours for bank holidays.

London Mix, I am sure you can make intelligent comments. Actually having sight of the docs is a bonus!

[Siduhe]

first mate, there is - it's in three of four in the Transport Statement, between 4-6 deliveries a day and have been plotted with a 10.7m lorry.

[first mate]

Actually, just to be clear, it looks like Southwark Planning received the application on 22nd November (the letter by the applicant is dated, 20th Nov) but the application was only scanned in by Southwark on 6th December. And the deadline for objections is 3rd Jan!

[LondonMix]

Ah, I didn't pick that up. So 3 weeks have elapsed with only 3 weeks left (many of which fall over the holiday period)!

[James]

Anyone whould think they had murdered someone. What exactly is the problem with a shop replacing another shop with a slightly different (nicer) design and improved facilities? It will look better and your houses will probably increase in value too. Presumably you were aware that Lordship lane is a busy South-East London shopping street when you moved here? And has been since the Victorian times? We are not in some rural idyll in Berkshire or something. Thriving shops are something many parts of England would give anything for. Some people, I feel, would complain about anything.

[LondonMix]

I have no issue with M&S coming to Lordship Lane (said that many times). This is one chain replacing another chain which happens all the time despite anyone's personal preference. My only concern is that the redevelopment of the shop is appropriate from an access rights perspective etc. A poor redevelopment isn't good for anyone.