Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Having read this briefly it just seems like council planning have done some rather large u turns on previous refusals but without the developer really giving an inch. WIth this and the new cinema CPZ will be next, just wait and see. Certain councillors must be rubbing their hands with glee.


Note that there will be up to 6 deliveries a day, by huge juggernauts, along a residential street, pretty much from dawn til dusk, seven days a week. Given ED is a town centre, say planning, they really see no reason to refuse. What has changed in planning I wonder? Still no explanation as to why one of the huge bollards is pushed over....plenty of space say planning. Madness.

first mate Wrote:

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

> Having read this briefly it just seems like

> council planning have done some rather large u

> turns on previous refusals but without the

> developer really giving an inch. WIth this and the

> new cinema CPZ will be next, just wait and see.

> Certain councillors must be rubbing their hands

> with glee.

>

> Note that there will be up to 6 deliveries a day,

> by huge juggernauts, along a residential street,

> pretty much from dawn til dusk, seven days a week.

> Given ED is a town centre, say planning, they

> really see no reason to refuse. What has changed

> in planning I wonder? Still no explanation as to

> why one of the huge bollards is pushed

> over....plenty of space say planning. Madness.



The use of the site isn't changing much, and the extension will make little difference. The Coop down the road manages deliveries pefectly well. Those in opposition don't really have much of a leg to stand on given the precedents.


In my opinion the car wash causes far more traffic disruption than occasional HGV deliveries for Iceland.

I wouldn't call 6 deliveries a day occasional, servicing snd safety are real issues with this applications. Objections that were formerly upheld on a number of occasions are being upheld no more. Why the change by Southwark one wonders?

first mate Wrote:

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

> I wouldn't call 6 deliveries a day occasional,

> servicing snd safety are real issues with this

> applications. Objections that were formerly upheld

> on a number of occasions are being upheld no more.

> Why the change by Southwark one wonders?


Perhaps local Cllrs might like to comment?

Feel very sympathetic towards the residents of Chesterfield Grove. I would find deliveries before 8am on any weekday intolerable if I were living there. Why can deliveries not be banned to the side before, say, 9am and after 8pm, and a part-time loading area in front be created for these hours as per Co-op to reduce this impact?

I do hope James Barber continues his support in objection to the application as strongly as he did prior to local elections.

I'm very disappointed that this application, having being refused in the past, and showing no evidence to adapt or change any plans at all (all of which has been discussed soooo many times on this thread already!), is now being recommended to be granted. How did this come about?

What is the point of being given the opportunity to voice well grounded opinions just for planning, never mind the major applicant, to dismiss common concerns from a range of different residents as if such issues raised are (as I feel is being read as) insignificant. What, indeed is the point of planning at all?

OAKIE95 it's not about people moaning. There are a number of points within the application which haven't been addressed by the applicant from the previous attempt. That's the issue here. I'm guessing you're not a resident of Chesterfield?


Louisa.

Louisa Wrote:

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

> OAKIE95 it's not about people moaning. There are a

> number of points within the application which

> haven't been addressed by the applicant from the

> previous attempt. That's the issue here. I'm

> guessing you're not a resident of Chesterfield?

>

> Louisa.


I don't get what the big issue is, admittedly I'm not familiar with all of the planning details, however, it's already a food outlet and will remain so if M&S take over. Surely Iceland has deliveries by lorry as would M&S? In fact if M&S were to be unpopular, surely they'd need less deliveries than the current (popular) Iceland?


Ron70

Coming into this very late but I lived on Chesterfield until 2002 - even then we used to have major issues with parking not to mention the Iceland HGV's that flaunted the restrictions on occasion and came hurtling down the road at 6.30am!! Thought about moving back a few years ago but then remembered the lorries & the parking ... feel for the residents now

Ron70 Wrote:

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

>

> I don't get what the big issue is, admittedly I'm

> not familiar with all of the planning details,

> however, it's already a food outlet and will

> remain so if M&S take over. Surely Iceland has

> deliveries by lorry as would M&S? In fact if M&S

> were to be unpopular, surely they'd need less

> deliveries than the current (popular) Iceland?

>

> Ron70


Ron I think one of many issues, is the number of deliveries the new M&S would want to have. The delivery times have been addressed to a degree on the new application but there hasn't been much movement on location. Why can goods not be delivered on LL rather than a narrow road like Chesterfield? I personally am in two minds about how much extra parking stress the new M&S will add to those already existing from the Iceland store, as a convenience outlet it is aimed primarily at commuters unlike a large supermarket. However, my concern would be that a similar style up market chain supermarket is not anywhere within close proximity to the area, and it could potentially pull in folk from the village and other affluent areas who are the ideal demographic that M&S would aim for - will they drive or walk?


Louisa.

Yes I agree M&S food outlets are everywhere these days, and it isn't necessarily 'up market', but it does have a middle class following, and it does charge more for it's goods on the whole. Are you honestly telling me you can't see wealthy village residents using their vehicles to pop down and pick up a few bits? And in larger numbers than they would for Iceland for example? No similar middle class marketed supermarket is within easy reach and convenient for these people, this will be.


Louisa.

So the main issue that people are crying about is that potential 'wealthy folk' and the 'middle class' might come to lordship lane and use M&S? Close your curtains and sound the alarms the wealthy folk are coming. Can someone confirm that we are in 2014?

*yawns*


Now now lets focus the issue is not the fact M&S are wanting to move in - who cares?

The problem is the planning application - mostly the expansion planned at the rear, delivery, extra stress on parking, facilities (access and refuse) for the proposed residential plans above the retail space etc.


Why the space cannot be used as it currently is (with a little bit of updating to the front) by M&S is the big question.

Without wishing to generalise, I think Louisa has a point. Though I don't use M&S foodhalls much, I know people who will and based on current habits they're quite likely to get into their car if it's more than 500 yards away, whereas my elderly neighbours, who've lived around here for decades, walk a lot further than that to Iceland for their weekly shop.


Not sure this is a plus or minus, but I think M&S food appeals mainly to single people - reasonably quality and no waste - or those who just want something in the course of their working day, so they won't be parking for long. Anyone who wants to do a family shop or bigger household stuff in the area would probably still head for Sainsbury's.

I appreciate this thread has had a bit of a reboot and people who've not previously commented wish to get their two pennies' worth in, but why the need to turn away from the main issues at hand? M&S Simply Food will be unlike any other supermarket for a good few miles around. It is convenience based, easy access from the main road, and providing an upmarket chain option for local people. If we already had one in the village, or Peckham, Forest Hill etc etc I wouldn't raise the issue of parking. It's the fact we are surrounded by affluence and therefore this particular supermarket will attract people who want that option. This will probably put a strain on parking in the surrounding streets. Why has this not been addressed by this planning application?


Louisa.

Louisa Wrote:

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

> I appreciate this thread has had a bit of a reboot

> and people who've not previously commented wish to

> get their two pennies' worth in, but why the need

> to turn away from the main issues at hand? M&S

> Simply Food will be unlike any other supermarket

> for a good few miles around. It is convenience

> based, easy access from the main road, and

> providing an upmarket chain option for local

> people. If we already had one in the village, or

> Peckham, Forest Hill etc etc I wouldn't raise the

> issue of parking. It's the fact we are surrounded

> by affluence and therefore this particular

> supermarket will attract people who want that

> option. This will probably put a strain on parking

> in the surrounding streets. Why has this not been

> addressed by this planning application?

>

> Louisa.


Perhaps local Cllrs might like to comment?

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

    • A A day-school for girls and a boarding school for boys (even with, by the late '90s, a tiny cadre of girls) are very different places.  Though there are some similarities. I think all schools, for instance, have similar "rules", much as they all nail up notices about "potential" and "achievement" and keeping to the left on the stairs. The private schools go a little further, banging on about "serving the public", as they have since they were set up (either to supply the colonies with District Commissioners, Brigadiers and Missionaries, or the provinces with railway engineers), so they've got the language and rituals down nicely. Which, i suppose, is what visitors and day-pupils expect, and are expected, to see. A boarding school, outside the cloistered hours of lesson-times, once the day-pupils and teaching staff have been sent packing, the gates and chapel safely locked and the brochures put away, becomes a much less ambassadorial place. That's largely because they're filled with several hundred bored, tired, self-supervised adolescents condemned to spend the night together in the flickering, dripping bowels of its ancient buildings, most of which were designed only to impress from the outside, the comfort of their occupants being secondary to the glory of whatever piratical benefactor had, in a last-ditch attempt to sway the judgement of their god, chucked a little of their ill-gotten at the alleged improvement of the better class of urchin. Those adolescents may, to the curious eyes of the outer world, seem privileged but, in that moment, they cannot access any outer world (at least pre-1996 or thereabouts). Their whole existence, for months at a time, takes place in uniformity behind those gates where money, should they have any to hand, cannot purchase better food or warmer clothing. In that peculiar world, there is no difference between the seventh son of a murderous sheikh, the darling child of a ball-bearing magnate, the umpteenth Viscount Smethwick, or the offspring of some hapless Foreign Office drone who's got themselves posted to Minsk. They are egalitarian, in that sense, but that's as far as it goes. In any place where rank and priviilege mean nothing, other measures will evolve, which is why even the best-intentioned of committees will, from time to time, spawn its cliques and launch heated disputes over archaic matters that, in any other context, would have long been forgotten. The same is true of the boarding school which, over the dismal centuries, has developed a certain culture all its own, with a language indended to pass all understanding and attitiudes and practices to match. This is unsurprising as every new intake will, being young and disoriented, eagerly mimic their seniors, and so also learn those words and attitudes and practices which, miserably or otherwise, will more accurately reflect the weight of history than the Guardian's style-guide and, to contemporary eyes and ears, seem outlandish, beastly and deplorably wicked. Which, of course, it all is. But however much we might regret it, and urge headteachers to get up on Sundays and preach about how we should all be tolerant, not kill anyone unnecessarily, and take pity on the oiks, it won't make the blindest bit of difference. William Golding may, according to psychologists, have overstated his case but I doubt that many 20th Century boarders would agree with them. Instead, they might look to Shakespeare, who cheerfully exploits differences of sex and race and belief and ability to arm his bullies, murderers, fraudsters and tyrants and remains celebrated to this day,  Admittedly, this is mostly opinion, borne only of my own regrettable experience and, because I had that experience and heard those words (though, being naive and small-townish, i didn't understand them till much later) and saw and suffered a heap of brutishness*, that might make my opinion both unfair and biased.  If so, then I can only say it's the least that those institutions deserve. Sure, the schools themselves don't willingly foster that culture, which is wholly contrary to everything in the brochures, but there's not much they can do about it without posting staff permanently in corridors and dormitories and washrooms, which would, I'd suggest, create a whole other set of problems, not least financial. So, like any other business, they take care of the money and keep aloof from the rest. That, to my mind, is the problem. They've turned something into a business that really shouldn't be a business. Education is one thing, raising a child is another, and limited-liability corporations, however charitable, tend not to make the best parents. And so, in retrospect, I'm inclined not to blame the students either (though, for years after, I eagerly read the my Old School magazine, my heart doing a little dance at every black-edged announcement of a yachting tragedy, avalanche or coup). They get chucked into this swamp where they have to learn to fend for themselves and so many, naturally, will behave like predators in an attempt to fit in. Not all, certainly. Some will keep their heads down and hope not to be noticed while others, if they have a particular talent, might find that it protects them. But that leaves more than enough to keep the toxic culture alive, and it is no surprise at all that when they emerge they appear damaged to the outside world. For that's exactly what they are. They might, and sometimes do, improve once returned to the normal stream of life if given time and support, and that's good. But the damage lasts, all the same, and isn't a reason to vote for them. * Not, if it helps to disappoint any lawyers, at Dulwich, though there's nothing in the allegations that I didn't instantly recognise, 
    • Another recommendation for Lorraine  - if you need help over the holidays, she still has a small amount of availability. Couldn’t recommend her more highly, she’s brilliant with our cat. Message her on 07718 752208 for more details re pricing etc.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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