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

[lpool]

I seem to remember the Co-op doing something similar and having their application rejected. It might be worth checking what the Licensing Committee said at the time.

[rch]

Hi, sorry for not explaining my strategic thinking more coherently...

I was hoping to circumvent the rejection of residents' objections based on Public Nuisance, by the developer citing that Lordship Lane is a designated Town Centre and therefore more conducive to later alcohol sales times, by using the Walworth hours as a comparison argument to strengthen our case.

But, having said that, my guess is that the later alcohol sales licenses in other shops in Lordship could probably be used as a precedent anyway.

So, yes, we should try to find out what opening hours that M&S are applying to operate in...

One thing that occurs to me is that Sainsbury's in the Village did the same thing... they applied for alcohol sales times later than their approved opening hours, which residents objected to... but then they claimed at the licensing meeting that all their shops apply for the same identical hours due to a central "corporate" management program, but then the shops' opening hours are tailored to the local area. So, just because Sainsbury's got a later alcohol license, this doesn't mean that they intend to use it.

So, it may be that M&S will indeed have a later alcohol license than their opening hours agreed by planning conditions, if that makes sense.

We'll just have to make sure that we keep our eye on everything!

[kibris]

I bet the people that keep going on and on this site about M&S will still be using it when it opens, also there are so many other shops that sell alcohol even to kids. So its good that M&S will not be doing that sell and when did Lordship lane become a Town Center its just a high street just like every other street in SOUTHWARK.

[rch]

Town Centre is a planning designation term... Lordship Lane became designated as a Town Centre years ago (2007?) in the original Southwark Plan:-

http://www.southwark.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/4160/draft_lordship_lane_town_centre_spg

In the New Southwark Plan (currently in consultation) it's designated as a District Town Centre.

This is basically just a way of referring to the legislation that affects planning and licensing applications, so that objections can be assessed.

[Dulwich Born And Bred]

At long last an end to this whole M&S Saga.

I wonder how long it will be before the next thread is started saying 'Co-Op to be a Waitrose'?

[kibris]

Here here Dulwichborn&bred, All them people that went on and on and on and at last its coming to an end and what do we have a VERY NICE M&S

[Louisa]

How do we know it's nice? It's a shop, on a high street, selling things. A chain shop at that.

Louisa.

[James Barber]

Sadly DB&B the saga continues. It appears that the 3rd floor flats have been built higher than the approved plan. I can;t believe that's an error from professional builders. The electric substation condition about noise hasn't been met and so it and the development dep. on its power are operating illegally disturbing nearby residents with humming noises.

So at public expense these will now be investigated and eventually after the developer slowly drags feet having caused this expensive resolved.

[edhistory]

I'm waiting to find out if the new ground floor footprint is as authorised.

[Siduhe]

James Barber Wrote:

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

> Sadly DB&B the saga continues. It appears that the

> 3rd floor flats have been built higher than the

> approved plan. I can;t believe that's an error

> from professional builders. The electric

> substation condition about noise hasn't been met

> and so it and the development dep. on its power

> are operating illegally disturbing nearby

> residents with humming noises.

>

> So at public expense these will now be

> investigated and eventually after the developer

> slowly drags feet having caused this expensive

> resolved.

Depressing news but totally predicable given how this developer has chosen to go about the process - as shown on numerous previous occasions. Here's hoping that Southwark Planning Enforcement will have the desire and resources necessary to sort this, rather than backing down when threatened with costs. Thanks for the update.

[KalamityKel]

Siduhe Wrote:

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

> James Barber Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Sadly DB&B the saga continues. It appears that

> the

> > 3rd floor flats have been built higher than the

> > approved plan. I can;t believe that's an error

> > from professional builders. The electric

> > substation condition about noise hasn't been

> met

> > and so it and the development dep. on its power

> > are operating illegally disturbing nearby

> > residents with humming noises.

> >

> > So at public expense these will now be

> > investigated and eventually after the developer

> > slowly drags feet having caused this expensive

> > resolved.

>

> Depressing news but totally predicable given how

> this developer has chosen to go about the process

> - as shown on numerous previous occasions. Here's

> hoping that Southwark Planning Enforcement will

> have the desire and resources necessary to sort

> this, rather than backing down when threatened

> with costs. Thanks for the update.

I wouldn't get your hopes up.

The council (planning) continues to prove it's inability to right wrongs or even to follow their own procedures.

As James points out... more public money wasted.

[first mate]

I doubt this is accidental. My guess is this was always the plan and the Developer is banking on the fact that the current local infatuation with M&S will stop planning enforcing policy and interfering with the build. They will then apply for retrospective permission and the very greedy developer wins again.

How sad that local warnings about the scale and design of this build were not heeded and are only 'discovered' when it is almost too late.

It is alleged that at the appeal for the fourth floor penthouses that S'wark Planning did a no show. James Barber do you know if that is true and if so why?

[LondonMix]

M&S has nothing to do with the flats. The enforcement against the developer's flats can proceed without impacting the store operations. They are two separate issues.

[first mate]

We'll see.

[James Barber]

Hi first mate,

I don't know about the appeal and who from Southwark Council did or didn't attend.

If you remind which particular planning application reference you're asking about I'll try and find out.

[first mate]

James,

This was the site inspection/visit by the Planning Inspectorate to determine the appeal on the fourth floor penthouses going ahead. Apparently the Inspector and developer turned up but S'wark Planning did not.

[Abe_froeman]

James I might be mistaken but I think this was the planning application that you called in?

[Abe_froeman]

Rosie Shimell might be able to shed some light.

Re: East Dulwich councillor - how can I help?

Posted by James Barber 17 September, 2015 16:55

The current residences at this property did not have planning permission.

If they get planning permission for the two flats on additional floor they'll then apply to convert the offices into flats. Such conversions the gov't has issues guidance are allowed and nearly nothing councils can do to stop them.

The result in 10 residential properties. Normally social housing is required for development of over 9 homes. So they'll have side stepped this.

Cllr Rosie Shimell and I are calling this in

[KalamityKel]

Was it not this one:

"CONSIDERATION of APPLICATION FOR FULL PLANNING PERMISSION

Application number: 15/AP/2221

Address: 84-90 LORDSHIP LANE, LONDON, SE22 8HF

Proposal: Rooftop extension to provide x 2 residential units and walkway to rear of existing office/residential at 1st and 2nd floor; use of first and second floors as offices and refurbishment of the existing retail store at ground floor including a single storey rear extension with associated plant.

It will be considered by the Council's Planning Sub-committee B which meets on:

date 8 March, 2016

time 19:00

venue Council Offices, 160 Tooley Street, London SE1 2QH

Recommended decision: Grant subject to Legal Agreement"

???

[Rosetta]

There will undoubtedly have been some palms crossed with silver.

[MissKing]

Now that M&S is open, it might about about time to close this thread!

[Alan Medic]

Most threads die naturally except if you add to it by suggesting it should be closed.

[first mate]

I'm afraid issues with this development and site affecting local residents are still very much alive. M&S vehicles unable to access service entrance and so parking up on street to unload, being just one. This is the new, very much reduced entrance that anyone with an ounce of common sense would have seen was not big enough for a development of this size, let alone one for a supermarket.

[KalamityKel]

The issue with the lorries accessing the site is NOT as bad as is led to believe.

The store/drivers AND neighbours are working hard together to find a workable solution.

There are other outstanding issues however - such as delivery times and the number of deliveries received throughout the day.

There are also questions over the permissions within the planning applications which are causing grumbles... with M&S passing everything over to their legal team this could go on for sometime!

[edhistory]

> There are also questions over the permissions within the planning applications which are causing grumbles... with M&S passing everything over to their legal team this could go on for sometime!

All of which M&S knew about when signing the lease?