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

[Penguin68]

Funnily enough if you do fear for Lordship Lane then having 12-18 months of site closure and rebuilding would be the worst possible result.

I do not agree here James, where there is clear and positive economic activity going on which is seen as regenerating an area - even if it is meant-times disruptive this normally gives a positive boost - I am sure were the work to be going on it would be clearly flagged as new accommodation and a new 'attractor' store - so others would be positive themselves about investing in the area - it is closure and stagnation which creates a downward spiral.

Investment attracts investment - empty stores (or, I am afraid pop-up and make-weight charity shops) repel it.

At the moment the ED/ LL Charity shops look positive-ish - at least they don't look like a desperate 'any port in a storm' move by site owners.

If Iceland is (a) to close and (b) to be replaced quickly by a 'proper' retailer (whether that be a chain or a quality independent) that is good - but for instance a pound or 99p store wouldn't be - if what you want to see is a vibrant and economically active high street.

[James]

So it might be a Waitrose...?

*SCREAMS with excitement*

[bil]

Um yes! good point! :-D

[first mate]

James Barber,

Despite your assertion that this application has been refused, according to the website today a decision on the application is still pending. There is also a documentent for an Amended plan A dated 21/2/2013.

Since you sit on the planning committee and it is stated that the decision rests with the planning committee, can you please tell us what is going on? Can you also explain what the Amended plan A document is?

[James Barber]

Hi first mate,

I'm a reserve for the main planning and one of the sub-committees.

The email reply you've recevied from officers you've kindly forwarded responds to your spefic query - why werent you told a committee would sit and decide this application. The officer has given you a generic answer that you would be told when the decision goes to committee.

But this decision is no longer expected at committee but rather under delegated powers by officers.

east Dulwich councillors have read all the documents on the web portal this time and before. We requested this decision be decided by a planning committee IF officers were minded under delegated powers to grant permission.

Officers have confirmed in writing several times they are writing a report to refuse the application.

But I've asked again because it is taking an awfully long time for this to happen and this delay is causing concern.

[first mate]

James,

Thank you. Do you know what the amended plan AA is? I have tried and failed to access this document several times.

This document is listed at the top of the apllication as follows:

Amended plan 1121/P (--)154 REV PE - PROPOSED SECTION AA 2013-02-21

[spanglysteve]

So as it stands at the moment, it could be a Waitrose, M&S or Iceland???? Let the forum meltdown commence!

[fazer71]

Edit woops wrong thread ...

[first mate]

James,

Another week passed and still no sign of a decision on the M&S/Iceland site application (target decision date was early March it says on website).

I have still been unable to open the document dated end Feb, Amended Plan AA. I followed your instructions but to no avail.

It is odd that you keep being told that the 'intention' is to refuse but nothing appears. Is this a case of weasel words?

I'd love to know what the Feb document is also, as this must have been submitted by the developer after the consultation period.

[davidh]

if the owner of the site persists in putting in applications that are ludicrous (such as wanting to build on land he does not own) then, of course, it will be rejected. I cannot understand why m&s do not help him put together an application that would be passed without further ado this has gone on far too long. if m&s can't or won't step in, let waitrose, who also want it, have the site. enough, already

[Huguenot]

I guess the owner is entitled to put in as many ridiculous applications as they want.

They're not really losing out at the moment, because Iceland are filling the gap like an unwanted doormat boy/girlfriend hanging on until someone better comes along!

M&S or Waitrose have no obligation or even interest in helping them out - they simply want the right properties at the right price. Any interference is only likely to weaken their negotiation position.

[James Barber]

Hi first mate,

I'm told from a reliable source that only one planner was in last Friday so the planned updates related to this case didnt happen. The one planners spent the day dealing with everyone's queries.

[KalamityKel]

That's a rather feeble excuse consider the decision was apparently made, according to you James, some time ago

[James Barber]

Hi KK,

It is very frustrating the decision taking so long to come through formally. It does make you wonder...

[the-e-dealer]

You can get planning permission to build on land you do not own. this would not oblige the owner in anyway.

[DulwichFox]

Yes..

You don't actually need to own land to apply for planning permission for it.

This means you can apply for permission before deciding whether or not to buy a piece of land.

http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/planning/applications/howtoapply/whocanapply

Fox

[davidh]

e-d and dulwich fox

yes, of course, he/she/it can bung is many apps as they wish. doesn't alter the fact that it is all time-wasting BS. as councillor jim has stated, the apps are deeply idiotic. sure this clown could be excluded as a vexatious\ludicrous moron. james tells me he does not know this person's identity and neither it seems does anyone else. this sounds barking mad.

[first mate]

Has a decision been made yet?

[Chillaxed]

first mate, just out of curiosity, why are you so engaged in this discussion? Good on you for keeping at it, but I assume you've some sort of vested interest in the application given your persistence?

[KalamityKel]

should local residents not b so interested chillaxed?

There's all these rumours that a decision has been made but nothing confirmed. why?

[Penguin68]

The Iceland site is an important part of LL - what store, if any, operates from that site will have a significant impact on ED residents - including the possibility of no store at all, if/ when Iceland leaves and there is no store to replace it. A decision has been announced in this forum, but not on any official Southwark site, it appears. Considering the extensive fuss and pother on this thread and many others about the retail future for LL, first mate's concerns do not by any means have to smack of suspicious partiality. We (actual ED residents who use this forum) all have an 'interest' (being ED residents, with some stake in the locality) in this.

[Chillaxed]

I'm not saying people shouldn't be interested, I'm just curious as to what motivates first mate. 'Just asking' I think is the hip phrase to use.

[Huguenot]

I was under the impression from posts passim that first mate lived just around the corner? Don't know if that was right or not.

[Penguin68]

I'm just curious as to what motivates first mate And some of us might be curious about why you are curious about first mate? You are insinuating that the interest being shown is somehow suspicious or motivated in non-obvious ways. 'Just asking' may not be a sufficient get-out here.

[KalamityKel]

Chillaxed Wrote:

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

> first mate, just out of curiosity, why are you so

> engaged in this discussion? Good on you for

> keeping at it, but I assume you've some sort of

> vested interest in the application given your

> persistence?

Vested interest?