Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Just to keep you all informed, the empty shops just along from the Plough Pub (357-361 Lordship Lane). That have been empty for a large period of time will become a New Sainsburys local store. If anyone has any questions about the site then post them on here or PM me and i will try to help.
Gawd!! Here we go again. Don't you think that if one of the chains was proposing a store on this site that it would have been opened years ago? The whole sight appears to be a speculative piece of property development. This is illustrated by the stop - go nature of the work. Weeks go by without anything being done. The whole project has been going on for well over 2 years already, probably a lot more, and the flats aren't even finished, let alone let. I actually wish one of the chains would open a convenience store on the site. The current offerings in that particular area of LL are pretty poor, and its been an eyesore for far too long. BTW. How on earth did the Polish grocery get a liquor licence? Aren't there already enough stores selling alcohol on this short strip?
Hi sorry i should have said in my original post that i work for the developers, Watmough Brothers Investments, who have owned the site for roughly thirty years haveing bought it from the co-op. Unfortunately due to the nature of completely rebuilding a site internally and adding extensions to the back of the property many people believe that no work has been done when infact there has been alot however not all visable.

This sucks anus. What has East Dulwich done to deserve another ugly blight of a supermarket under our noses, don't they syphon off enough money from local communities/small shopkeepers with out having to be here too, what's wrong with the one on dog kennel hill? Don't they make enough money? I am no anti capitalist quite the contrary but with such a vibrant community there must be other businesses the landlord could do business with?


What a sell out.


thanks greedy bollox love you too.

I would rather have a Sainsbury's there than empty units. At least it will mean that people at that end of East Dulwich don't have to trek to Dog Kennel Hill to get their groceries in. I am sure it will be very popular.


I know a lot of people will perceive this as a threat to independent shops, but I think that small shops should be able to survive by providing products/service/environment that you can't get in a supermarket.

I'm surprised at the suggestion that this shop site will be a Sainsburys local.

Somerfield recently applied and obtained an alcolhol licence. It would seem surprisng if Somerfield/Coop had sold this site/option.


If it is Sainsbury's they need to apply for an alcohol licence which I would be notified of and have'nt.

Have the anti-chain gang not considered the fact that a Sainsbury's here might actually bring MORE footfall to the area - thus helping the independents that have set up here?


The other end of Lordship Lane has two supermarkets - and several newsagents. It seems there's enough custom to sustain them all.

There's already quite a few non-chain, long-established, food shops around there so I'd be amazed if any of these would welcome a Sainsbury's local. I suspect the Forest Hill "big" Sainsbury's might lose a bit of trade too...


Oh and I believe Enid Blyton was very young indeed when she moved out from across the road! :))

Its only that if it does get built ( as planned) lorries ( if large ones) would have trouble getting under ( only high enough -Just- for fire engines


glad that something is finally being done anyway



LordLane Wrote:

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

> andyxlandells, we have got permission for the flat

> so at some stage it will be built however when

> this will happen i do not know.

It seems I was a little over the top with my post last night on this thread and some what unkind to lord lane, it has been pointed out that perhaps I should not shoot the meesenger or use unkind language in an open forum. I have to say that in hindsight I agree with that and would therefor like to offer an apology to lord lane.


sorry


iain.

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

    • Hi Eleanor, I run the Just Dance Fit classes mentioned above. It would be lovely to have you there. I’m at the dance studio at Harris Girls’ Academy on Homestall Road throughout the year every Monday, Wednesday and Sunday: Mondays 6:30-7:30pm - Just Dance Fit Mondays 7:30-8:30pm - Flowetic Wednesdays 6:30-7:30pm - Flowetic Sundays 10:30-11:30am - Flowetic Lots of information and booking via the website: www.justdanceuk.com but if you have any questions don’t hesitate to drop me a line at 07522 231 446 or [email protected]. Hope this helps! Fiona =)
    • a) Because they published a leaflet in Urdu promising to give "Muslims a strong voice". This is reprehensible - just as a party that promised to give Protestants or Jews or Buddhists alone "a strong voice" would be acting in a sectarian manner. Parties - especially socialist ones like the English & Welsh Greens are now - should not be assymetrically promoting the interests of one religious group. b) Because they published a video in Urdu and Bangla criticising Kier Starmer for meeting Narendra Modi, when Modi has nothing to do with the issues discussed. Modi is a Hindu nationalist bigot - but in this context, the Greens are just shitstirring existing tensions between British Hindus and British Muslims for the purpose of trying to win Muslim votes - see the first point. FWIW I don't have any problem with parties communicating with the electorate in languages other than English (from Irish to Polish to Malayalam). What is very suspicious is when parties pump out sectarian messages only in one language... When Mamdani ran for Mayor of NYC (and won) he released plenty of campaign videos in multiple languages - but always with English subtitles too. There was never a suggestion he was sending different, sectarian messages to different groups.     https://uk.news.yahoo.com/why-greens-made-advert-urdu-164616073.html https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/uk/uk-green-party-accused-of-sectarianism-after-releasing-videos-in-urdu-and-bangla-featuring-pm-modi-and-gaza/articleshow/128826689.cms  
    • @Sue the Green's campaign video showing Keir Starmer shaking hands with Modi and David Lammy shaking hands with Netanyahu is one such example.  As I say, I don't know the organisation, but I would expect election observers to only report after polls have closed. To do otherwise could be perceived as interfering in the election. They might need to check patterns across multiple polling stations. Any public criticism by an independent observer mid-poll could discourage participation and could be interpreted as campaigning. Much safer / more robust to check observations and release after the event.  Sorry - those posts merged. Not intended.   
    • Could you be more specific as to how "the Greens have practiced this on a far more significant scale in Gorton and Denton"? How exactly did they "try to exploit ethic tensions"?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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