Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I too been wondering what become of demoilshed,garden centre site.

Previously on another thread was told morris sons were refused due to lack provision fir parking .

So see this must been resolved but how they going fit all 3 premises not that huge site.

Not really Louisa-- The M&S that will be opened is a similar grab and go format rather than one of the more traditional stores. Also, there is much more housing being developed as part of that scheme.


Not sure why this has been much less controversial...

I agree LM the proposed M&S is a convenience format, but all the indications are that it will attract a wider audience for reasons outlined on the other thread. The housing developed as part of this scheme I would imagine is aimed at people without cars, seeing as it's right next to the station and by an important bus stop. And equally the Morrisons will be aimed at people using the station. I think marks picked the wrong spot on LL.


Louisa.

I think Louisa has a point.


People go in all directions from the station and for a lot of people, walking down to the Iceland site, then all the way back on the way home from work, whilst eminently do-able, isn't that convenient.


That said, they probably made their decision on what looked available at a certain point in time, and I'm sure an M&S on LL would/will do well.

That wasn't my point actually. Being right by the station may be a better location in terms of footfall. However, the idea that people will drive to M&S but won't the Morrisons doesn't make sense as they are five minutes apart on foot.


Same for the flats.

No local councillors said on previous thread morris sons were refused due unable provide proof proper disabled parking and that was a convince store.

Not sure why no trade taken away sainsburys mentioned to me I did not mention that.

Metro stores are not tiny I can see one would fit.but a library aswell,flats I guess would be above shop feasible in this modern day.

Southwark must have decided 2nd application acceptable.

I'm glad aswell need a convenient store I am others don't have time go to tesco metro.


True nothing like that our end Ed

LondonMix Wrote:

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

> However, the idea that people will

> drive to M&S but won't the Morrisons doesn't make

> sense as they are five minutes apart on foot.

>

> Same for the flats.



M&S is a totally different offering to Morrisons and IMO will attract a wider audience. People will drive from relatively nearby to use this store whereas they would be less likely to do so for the Morrrisons. It's right by a supermarket for bigger food shops, no one in their right mind would drive to a small format store when a major supermarket with free parking is right next door. Completely different prospect.


Louisa.

There are bigger M&S stores nearby (Brixton and Camberwell for example) so it really is serving a relatively small catchment.


Talking about people driving to a small format convenience store (be it Morrisons or M&S) when the train station is also 5 minutes walk away and there is a bus stop right in front seems a bit of a stretch to me.


M&S simply food is a convenience format store just like the Morrison's that will be opening . Its exactly like the mini Tesco and the mini Sainsbury that already are in the area. They will sell staple food, some frozen options and greeting cards etc. Who is driving out of their way for that-- you certainly can't do a weekly shop in one of them.

Yes LM bigger stores eh Walworth Road and Brixton are nearby, but both a nightmare to drive to and get parked up most times especially during rush hour from the village or west Dulwich for example. The LL development would be much easier but still far enough away to probably want to drive. The Alleyns and Dulwich College catchment area will encourage parents after school to use this new convenience store over and above a sainsburys supermarket for example. It's convenience, but it's aimed at a different market and they will use it because it's close enough to drive to and avoid the traffic obstacles of Brixton and Walworth. The Morrisons will not attract this audience of that I'm sure. God only knows what would happen if Waitrose opened up. It would be chaos.


Louisa.

I'm with Louisa on the possible customer split. The M&S will be selling more prepared meals, I'm guessing, hoping to catch the 'rushed home before going out, don't want to bother to cook but want something 'nice' for dinner' brigade. And snacks/ dips etc. Probably not a lot of 'cook from scratch' food. I guess Morrison's will be selling more home cooking components/ ingrediants. If they get the stocking right then will be more complementary, meeting different needs/ demographics, than strictly competitive. Neither will be weekly shop destination stores - although both will offer 'unique to them' elements which might form part of a weekly shop.
  • 4 months later...

As already said it's going to be a library + flats + shop


Redevelopment of existing garden centre to provide a 4 storey building comprising basement storage and plant areas; ground floor Class A1 retail unit and D1 community (shown as library) unit; with 20 residential units (5 x 1 bed, 11 x 2 bed and 4 x 3 bed flats) on the first, second and third floors together with associated parking, amenity, landscaping, waste and cycle storage.


http://planningonline.southwark.gov.uk/AcolNetCGI.exe?ACTION=UNWRAP&RIPNAME=Root.PgeResultDetail&TheSystemkey=9538657

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

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, afaics, the civil penalties mentioned  were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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