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

[derwentgrove]

I can't pretend to be familiar with the whole of the planning history (other than that gleamed from this thread) but it sounds as if Louisa is probably correct. If those with (no doubt sincere) concerns had focussed on the imposition of conditions from the outset - rather than objecting outright - it seems less likely that there would have been (a) an appeal and (b) findings made by the inspector on appeal which last night's committee were advised they should not depart from. Isn't that the lesson to take away for future developments?

[first mate]

This is appalling. In conclusion, if you have the financial muscle you can do the wrong thing and get away with it. It is hard to believe that someone, somewhere in planning/council might not have forseen how this would go? It always felt that come hell or highwater this application was going to go through and that leaves one feeling that the will of the developers and large companies will always prevail despite the legitimate concerns of local residents.

Part of me wonders if a very elaborate long game has been played out with local residents as the chumps, given the illusion they had a chance to change the application by the process of consultation, where in reality it was always only going to go one way.

I really do think that CPZ will be back on the agenda soon.

[cl]

derwentgrove,

Given the way this has been dealt with by the council (which can leave objectors justifiably aggrieved), I'm not sure pushing the focus/responsibility for failure onto the objectors is reasonable. To do so is essentially absolving the council of their responsibility for this. Objections only form a part of the considerations and decision-making process for the council and the imposition of conditions would have been an option that was very apparent/obvious to planners regardless of what objectors asked for, and to therefore suggest this is a failure on behalf of the objectors is not really fair.

and also misses the point that many objectors did ask for conditions rather than outright refusal anyway.

[Penguin68]

I doubt very much whether the developer (presumably ground landlord) of the Iceland site can really be said to have 'financial muscle' in the grand scheme of things. M&S (from other posts) is not part of this consortium, nor, it appears, will it necessarily be the next tenant of the shop site. Its input has been (as I understand it) to outline what its requirements would be of such a site, were it to move in, around which the plans have been structured, and to allow its logo to be used for illustrative purposes in the application.

The claims made by some people of the possible parking pressures (40 or more spaces required) are very much of the same credibility as the (obviously erroneous) statement about visits by tube (although I am guessing this may have been in anticipation of the much vaunted, (and now I gather exploded) idea of the tube being extended to ED station. However had they said that visitors would arrive by public transport, including rail to ED I susepct their 15%(?) would not have been far wrong. It's all guesswork anyway, at this stage. I suspect the planners may have taken a 'typo' into account when considering the source of customers.

The planners are seeing two proposals (1) - more accommodation in ED - to many a good thing and (2) a slightly larger supermarket where there already is one. Apart from issues of disruptive deliveries (which they have set a check on) there was little, realistically, they could do to block this. Frankly, far more disruptive to locals will be the creation of a school on the old Whateley Road police station site (with the obviously high traffic/ parking-up impact at start and end of the school day, together no doubt with increased parking demands locally by those working at the school - the fuzz could park on site).

All change (normally) has positives and negatives - and particularly on those living closest. If the new supermarket isn't wanted by the wider ED population - then there won't need to be that many deliveries. If it is wanted, then a utilitarian approach may be the best (for the most).

[healey]

> A precedent has now been set so expect all sorts

> of ridiculous applications to be made and accepted

> by the council.

How is it ridiculous when there has been a large grocery retail space on that site for decades?

> Ladies and gentlemen of ED, welcome to your new M&S Simply Food store.

I'll be using it. On foot.

[James Barber]

I'm please that Cllr Rosie Shimell and I called-in this planning decision. It resulted in more scurtiny and tougher conditions beign set than if officers had granted permission under delegated powers.

The committee did not vote unanimously and some 2 of the 7 councillors clearly thought it could be refused. Saldy they werent in the majority.

So we will get a store there IF the developer can work out who owns the access - one objector was clear they owned half the access and would be closing it.

Equally local residents can still exert pressure for more reasonable delivery times and access. After the way M&S have treated them I suspect they wont have the same good will thaT Iceland have required to deliver to their store.

[Earl Aelfheah]

'The way M&S have treated them'. I thought this was the lease holder's application?

[Jeremy]

One thing I don't get... if the planning application is being made independently of M&S, why are delivery times part of the application? Doesn't make sense.

[AbDabs]

Jeremy Wrote:

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

> One thing I don't get... if the planning

> application is being made independently of M&S,

> why are delivery times part of the application?

> Doesn't make sense.

Because the developers are going to build a store significantly bigger than the current one so whoever moves in will want to increase deliveries (whether it be M&S, Aldi or Poundstretcher etc)

The delivery times would be imposed on any future occupier.

[harold76]

James - my wife was at the planning meeting yesterday (we're residents of Chesterfield Grove). It seemed that the increase in parking space requirements with a larger supermarket wasn't on the agenda. Is it thought that this just won't be a problem, or that nothing can be done about it?

[LD929]

James Barber Wrote:

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

> So we will get a store there IF the developer can

> work out who owns the access - one objector was

> clear they owned half the access and would be

> closing it.

Well that'll be interesting. How can this not be established already?

[harold76]

My wife heard the objector at the meeting yesterday raise this, however, the development representatives made it very clear that this has already been refuted, and they had the legal documentation to prove it.

[KalamityKel]

harold76 Wrote:

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

> My wife heard the objector at the meeting

> yesterday raise this, however, the development

> representatives made it very clear that this has

> already been refuted, and they had the legal

> documentation to prove it.

or disprove it...

[worldwiser]

I very much doubt the new school will generate much parking. With the demand for places likely to be insane it'll come down to residency within shortest distances from the school gates. I expect the average commute will be somewhere between a quarter and a third of a mile. Parents would be out of their minds to drive a distance which would take longer than walking. I for one will be choosing to walk. Assuming of course we get a place.

[Jeremy]

AbDabs Wrote:

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

> Because the developers are going to build a store

> significantly bigger than the current one so

> whoever moves in will want to increase deliveries

> (whether it be M&S, Aldi or Poundstretcher etc)

> The delivery times would be imposed on any future

> occupier.

But wouldn't deliveries vary greatly depending on the type of occupant? i.e. someone selling predominantly fresh foods would need much more frequent deliveries.

[AbDabs]

Absolutely right Jeremy, which is why any restrictions set for M&S (who do have a high fresh food offering) will be fine for any other retailer

[BrandNewGuy]

worldwiser Wrote:

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

> I very much doubt the new school will generate

> much parking. With the demand for places likely to

> be insane it'll come down to residency within

> shortest distances from the school gates. I expect

> the average commute will be somewhere between a

> quarter and a third of a mile. Parents would be

> out of their minds to drive a distance which would

> take longer than walking. I for one will be

> choosing to walk. Assuming of course we get a

> place.

Don't forget teachers and other staff. They are unlikely to live very locally, so are far more likely to use cars.

[LondonMix]

No one will be driving to this school. The catchment for the nearest primary to it is just over 200m. Unless the school is very unpopular everyone who gets in will be walking to it rather than driving. Teachers and other staff may very well commute by public transport. Everyone I know uses public transport to get to work (including those with cars who primarily use them on the weekend).

[BrandNewGuy]

LondonMix Wrote:

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

> Teachers and other staff may very

> well commute by public transport. Everyone I know

> uses public transport to get to work (including

> those with cars who primarily use them on the

> weekend).

There are plenty of people who use their cars to commute within London, including teachers.

[Penguin68]

No one will be driving to this school. The catchment for the nearest primary to it is just over 200m. Unless the school is very unpopular everyone who gets in will be walking to it rather than driving.

I would agree that with one (or more) children at that school parents or carers are most likely to walk, but once you have children at more than one school logistics of getting them both to school on time frequently require, if you have access to a car, a car journey - particularly if you then need to get to a station yourself to get to work. Been there, done that, got the wrinkes.

[Cora]

Why are you all talking about driving to school....aren't we talking about a supermarket application here?

[LondonMix]

Primary school age children going to different schools is rare as siblings are prioritised before distance when making offers. If there is anyone with too small children at different schools, they will be a very small exception rather than something to plan traffic patterns around.

Most people in London do not drive to work. This is not a matter of opinion. Within Inner London (Southwark is part of Inner London), only 21% of people get to work by car. The vast majority use public transport.

Heber which is a similar sized primary has 69 staff (including cleaners) so may 13-14 people might travel by car statistically.

No one will be driving to this school. The catchment for the nearest primary to it is just over 200m. Unless the school is very unpopular everyone who gets in will be walking to it rather than driving. Teachers and other staff may very well commute by public transport. Everyone I know uses public transport to get to work (including those with cars who primarily use them on the weekend).

However, my personal experience is that trades people who have to travel for work by car (and are included in the official stats) make up a hefty portion of that 21% so my guess would be less than 5 staff at most would plan to commute by car.

[ruffers]

This isn't an ordinary school..

[LondonMix]

Cora Wrote:

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

> Why are you all talking about driving to

> school....aren't we talking about a supermarket

> application here?

Yes, of course you are right.

Except M&S Simply Food is not a supermarket, it?s a small convenience store format. The argument whether M&S or the primary school will generate more traffic is a bit daft. Neither will generate much traffic.

Only time will tell if the access issues with the lorries is too narrow. However, deliveries up until 10pm at night and starting at 7am in the morning and up to 6 times a day is pretty rotten on a residential street. However, I don?t know how much more an increase this is compared to Iceland or what is considered normal if you live near a shop.

[spider69]

ruffers Wrote:

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

> This isn't an ordinary school..

It's intake will be M & S fed children