New out of town shop on East Dulwich Road

[the-e-dealer]

Its not Mc Poisons again is it? Hope not- They wanted a drive thru (their spelling) and it was rejected on traffic grounds.

[LondonMix]

Sorry, am I missing something? What does this application have to do with a mega-nursery?

[the-e-dealer]

Presumably there's a permission for a mega nursery on the site.

[Louisa]

Here come Waitrose!

Louisa.

[a peace of cake]

Am surprised to see that James Barber refers to parking on Crystal Palace Rd near the leisure centre as a 'nightmare'. At the time when it was proposed to resite the entrance from East deulwich road he was in full support and positively sneered at my neighbour and myself - who live opposite-when we raised parking and congestion issues at the planning committee!

He accused us of being anti community and selfish.

Note ever likely to get my vote. wonder what brought about his change of heart.

[neilson99]

Great to see this go through especially if this is an

anchor/destination store for the shops on East Dulwich road, still

don't see why East Dulwich retail can only exist on Lordship Lane

in James Barber's view, seems very short sighted.

[maxxi]

Mega nursery!?

*weeps into bowl of rusks.

[shaunag]

It does happen that anchor shops draw people to spend their money when they previously would have gone elsewhere. The local newsagent by my office closed down within 6 months (maybe even 3) of a tesco express opening nearby, having been open for years... Also in Cambridge a few years ago the out of town shopping became so popular that the shops in town started shutting down; people browsed there, but bought out of town; of course there is a massive new centre in town there now and no longer there regularly so don't know the impact. Just saying James might not deserve the bashing; competition from supermarkets may not detract all custom from smaller grocers, but it will certainly take some; whether any loss in sales would be enough to shut a few places down who knows-but the rents are going up and a few places have gone already do there may be something in it. (Also I'm not remotely politically motivated, but I find all the james bashing would actually sway me to supporting him rather than what I imagine the desired effect is)!

[Michael Palaeologus]

The opening of large shop doesn't necessarily mean the demise of smaller local shops. Tesco Express has not seen the death of the local shops on ED Road next to Locale. The smaller supey has upgraded and become a Londis.

A new mainstream supermarket-express would give a local alternative to Tesco Express, Coop and Iceland.

[Cardiffgirl]

If you read the case officer's delegated report it is clear the applicant satisfied the correct planning tests. It demonstrated that there were no available premises within any defined centre (not only East Dulwich but Camberwell, Herne HIll and Peckham too). On this basis, and going back to my original post, investment into an empty premises should surely be welcomed. It will create jobs and bring an empty unit back into use. Given its scale it didnt need to demonstrate what impact it would have of these centres.

As far as retail tests go, this application seems to fulfil these and really I dont understand James how you can be "amazed" that planning permission has been granted. Your Government is encouraging the planning system to be pro-growth after all.

[gsirett]

I've not been on the forum for a while and I've just read through this thread.

Yet again, councillor Barber shows his true colours: a man on a campaign to change the world into his personal view of what it should look like, with little or no regard for those who voted for him.

He now claims to be a friend of the Lordship Lane trader - hmmmm

Here is a deputation that Clr Barber heard from the traders last year about controlled parking:

http://southsouthwarkbusinessassociation.blogspot.co.uk/2012/01/deputation-to-dulwich-community-council.html

After listenting to that, he was one of only 3 (out of 9?) councillors to vote in favour of controlled parking.

[James Barber]

The choices for this site are between a large nursery, and we have a terrible shortage of nursery places, or a retail shop but our existing shops on Lordship Lane tell me they re are really struggling.

Sadly Southwakr Council refused the nursery due to loss of office space that allows employment but granted permission for a shop which would employ less than a nurery. At appeal we managed to get the nursery granted permission.

Hi gsirett,

A number of shops on Grove Vale would have liked controlled parking running for 1 hour each day as it would enable their customer to come and go as well as deliveries to more easilly come and go. Equally a number of shops feared it.

It didnt proceed and your view prevailed. Well done. If you recall my instance the decision was referred to the Dulwich Community Council helped give you that opportuntiy to win. You may hat emy views on this issue but I helped ensure your views could win.

[tomk]

>

> Sadly Southwakr Council refused the nursery due to

> loss of office space that allows employment but

> granted permission for a shop which would employ

> less than a nurery. At appeal we managed to get

> the nursery granted permission.

James, I don't quite follow this. Are you saying that the permission has changed again, so quickly (from retail to nursery). Or that it has now has 2 permissions - retail and childcare? (

[the-e-dealer]

You dont Change Permissions. You just grant new ones the existing one stays for , I think 5 years.

[Girl82]

tomk Wrote:

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

> >

> > Sadly Southwakr Council refused the nursery due

> to

> > loss of office space that allows employment but

> > granted permission for a shop which would

> employ

> > less than a nurery. At appeal we managed to get

> > the nursery granted permission.

>

> James, I don't quite follow this. Are you saying

> that the permission has changed again, so quickly

> (from retail to nursery). Or that it has now has 2

> permissions - retail and childcare? (

Agreed - I'm confused now too. Which is it going to be, retail or nursery?

[LondonMix]

It seems like a group including James B and (who?) tried to get a separate planning permission in place in an attempt to stop the retail unit. Who else is in that we James?

Also, there are shops opening up in Lordship Lane all the time so I really am not sure that they are struggling as much as they might not want additional competition which of course is good for consumers but less great for businesses (small or otherwise). What I find galling is that you support a supermarket in the new residential development of the garden centre (on other threads) so your opposition here seems hypocritical...

[the-e-dealer]

A separate planning permission wouldn't stop something else.

[LondonMix]

Yes, you are right of course. There clearly seemed to be the hope though...

the-e-dealer Wrote:

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

> A separate planning permission wouldn't stop

> something else.

[eagleeyedi]

How is East Dulwich road opp Goose Green 'out of town' anyway?? Anything that improves that building has got to be a bonus - it's a monstrosity!

[Louisa]

I think out of town refers more specifically to the type of retail unit it may attract, rather than its location.

Louisa.

[Michael Palaeologus]

So, Homebase then?

The unit is too small for an out of town shopping experience.

It was Cllr Barber's way of describing something not on the Lane.

[James Barber]

Thanks the-e-dealer.

Yes, tomk, the site now has three states. Office, retail or nursery.

[Michael Palaeologus]

So, Toys-R-Us HQ building then?

[the-e-dealer]

Or children for sale

[Michael Palaeologus]

OMG!!

Child trafficking on our very door step!!

Cllr mount your steed!! You have a cause!!!