M&S on Lordship Lane

[Earl Aelfheah]

So it kind of sounds like deliveries to the front (which appears to be what's happening) is actually everyone's preference anyhow.

[Siduhe]

Totally agree, front deliveries have to be better for residents - but I would expect restrictions that mean rush hour traffic (buses) aren't affected - there are already restrictions on early morning or late night deliveries so it wouldn't be too hard to amend these so that deliveries are the middle of the day. The question is if the Council (and I guess TFL) will agree to change the condition - they were clear back in 2012 that the development wouldn't be acceptable with deliveries on Lordship Lane.

What would be unacceptable (IMO) is for M&S just ignore the current delivery restrictions which were formally agreed and do what the heck they want because the store is open now and it's easier all round. If the developer and M&S wanted deliveries at the front they should have fought for it as part of the planning rather than spending months convincing everyone that deliveries at the back of the store work.

[KalamityKel]

LondonMix Wrote:

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

> Just caught up on Sidue posts- I think the

> lorries were using that back and Chesterfield

> residents asked them to stop. I'm not sure why

> but they seemed to reach an agreement for street

> deliveries instead. I agree a formal approved

> amendment to the original planning application

> should be made and approved with new conditions as

> required by TFL etc.

There is no such agreement in place at all at present. It would seem, while the issue is still being sorted with M&S (probably with the "legal" team as residents are always being fobbed off with), they (M&S) have chosen to try deliveries - which are not meant to take place before 7am Mon-Fri, 8am Sat and 10am Sunday/Bank holidays (unless a successful amendment has been made to the conditions placed on the planning application)- from the front to avoid further problems arising with effected neighbours.

[Michael Palaeologus]

First Dine-In Meal Deal of the new era.

Lamb steaks, salad bowl, raspberries and a bottle of Merlot. Saving of 8 quid.

[LondonMix]

Ah, I see. So its not an agreement as much as a means to avoid confrontation! The plot thickens.

KalamityKel Wrote:

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

> LondonMix Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Just caught up on Sidue posts- I think the

> > lorries were using that back and Chesterfield

> > residents asked them to stop. I'm not sure

> why

> > but they seemed to reach an agreement for

> street

> > deliveries instead. I agree a formal approved

> > amendment to the original planning application

> > should be made and approved with new conditions

> as

> > required by TFL etc.

>

> There is no such agreement in place at all at

> present. It would seem, while the issue is still

> being sorted with M&S (probably with the "legal"

> team as residents are always being fobbed off

> with), they (M&S) have chosen to try deliveries -

> which are not meant to take place before 7am

> Mon-Fri, 8am Sat and 10am Sunday/Bank holidays

> (unless a successful amendment has been made to

> the conditions placed on the planning

> application)- from the front to avoid further

> problems arising with effected neighbours.

[Beaky]

Went in at lunchtime today to pick up my Click and Collect which I ordered yesterday. Very simple and in and out in 5 mins. You can tell the schools have gone back. Very pleasant experience and saves a trip to Brixton.

[Peckhamgatecrasher]

"Join me and boycott M&S until they start putting their lorries where they're supposed to."

I'm not sure that will work. I'm still running a one-woman campaign against Sky for nicking the cricket. Surprisingly, I don't seem to be affecting their business.

[first mate]

Again, just so everyone is clear:

The servicing area was massively reduced as part of the developer's multiple applications. In short, a whole car park was removed and built on.

The retailers said they would want more deliveries extending delivery times, but using the same sized vehicles as Iceland.

Somehow the developer managed to persuade Southwark Council that black was white and that the abve could be achieved with no adverse effects to residents. Quite how they managed that is up to the individual to conclude.

As many if you know, residents repeatedly protested that the new applications were not workable or, indeed, safe.

Please remember that one of the bollards at the service entrance was bent sideways, with large, visible red paint scrape marks. That 'evidence' has now been removed and replaced. However, at an earlier site inspection a planning offcer reported words to the effect that it was not provable that this damage had been caused by an Iceland lorry and so he chose to ignore this as a relevant factor in determining the suitability of the service entrance for even more deliveries in future.

The wider community may be delighted with their M&S fodder but residents nearby warned planning that the service entrance was not feasible and were ignored in a way that beggars belief. Why would planning do that???

[KidKruger]

Because they're bent as a nine bob note, obvs.

They can be paid off if it's done the right way, come on.

There's a certain developer around crystal palace road area who does what he wants, regardless of what local residents voice as concerns. He uses very clever approach to the loopholes and foibles of the planning application process, one example being when he 'submits an application' he sends the cheque to the correct fees dept and SAYS he's sent the actual application to the relevant dept (or says he sent each package separately to same dept). After a while he starts building / alterations, when people start complaining to council he says well the chq got cashed so I thought that meant I had permission agreed, I never received a Refusal letter (which you wouldn't if you'd not submitted an application, but he argues he did and that Southwark must have lost it which is not his fault).

Of course he never sends the application and he never gets forced to undo his building works.

[first mate]

KK,

Exactly the sort of thing I wish local councillors would investigate and try to iron out, of much greater service to the community than some of the other things that get attention. I don't want to make wild accusations but it would appear that planning are at the very least incompetent in the extreme.

[Penguin68]

As this development has been so much in the public gaze (and scrutinised by at least one councillor) such a suggestion is very unlikely (and very possibly libelous) in this case. Far more likely I'm afraid is the application of a utilitarian approach (greatest good for greatest number) where the immediate neighbours' needs are being trumped by those of the rest of ED - who 'want' a flagship shop and (more importantly perhaps) don't want a blighted empty shop space. The Iceland space was a retail curiosity - too large for a small shop, not large enough for a retailer other than Iceland - where most of the storage could be done in the open retail space in freezers. The only design option was to loose the parking spaces behind and pretend delivery wasn't going to be an issue. That way LL keeps up its profile - which is actually good for both residents and other local retailers, and bad only for a relatively small group of immediate neighbours. Which is, of course, very sad for them.

[edhistory]

For reference here is a picture of car park before it was built over.

Still awaiting the District Valuer's measurements.

[first mate]

Penguin, let's not forget safety.

You seem to think planning have not been incompetent but looked to the greater good?

[DulwichFox]

No one has mentioned the Heli-pad yet..

Foxy..

[Louisa]

A car wash, turning space for large delivery vehicles, parking for residents along with pedestrian access, all in a very small cramped residential street. An accident waiting to happen. It's understandable immediate residents would be upset surely?

Louisa.

[Rhinestone Cowboy]

All this week I have been scooting into work early.

Noticed the large M&S delivery at 6.30am everyday.

Thursday morning, lots of guys with microphones in street and on pavement measuring noise of the delivery. Not sure it was best idea to stand in the street with Cars/Buses but guess they are doing something about deliveries/noise.

[DulwichFox]

Popped in to the Co-op today.. 13.15 ..The place is a disaster area...

No croissants.. cinnamon swirls ... and other cakes.

No bread / rolls . just some sliced bread..

Depleted Veg. section.

Pizza shelfs empty..

Virtually no milk except flavoured stuff..

No Customers.. No queues..

They are suffering.. Cannot see them surviving.

DulwichFox

[jaywalker]

I agree about co-op - was very surprised on my trip yesterday about shelves, milk etc. But not really a problem for them as their supermarket is (fairly) profitable nationally (unlike their bank) and they don't of course have shareholders just you and me to receive our share of profits (well, I remember getting a share three years ago).

Clearly they are out of tune with the new demographic here.

Noticed that mid-day today the parking on LL near M & S was being occupied by a Londis truck, lol.

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

???? wrote:

>

> 'Evil' Big Buisness makes a profit by supplying

> goods and services that people want.....

Thanks for explaining how capitalism works. In this world dominated workers' co?peratives and collectively owned enterprises, I hadn't picked up on it. It seems a bit weird that they didn't mention it on that eceonmics degree I did, but presumably they foresaw the rise of smartarses on Internet forums and figured it would all work itself out. I had also wondered if the the morality of something was proportional to its profitability, so it's nice to have that confirmed once and for all...

...you tit

[DulwichFox]

Mc Vities Fig Rolls 200g Londis ?1.89.. Morrisons ?1.00.

Price to pay for convenience.

DulwichFox

[Louisa]

I don't mind paying the price for convenience if it's good quality convenience.

The basic variety 'simply m&s' range of butter was no different to the lidl basic butter, but getting on close for double the price. Lidl is just as convenient for me and has a free car park to boot if I didn't fancy the walk.

So far the wine has impressed, if the layout is somewhat shoddy, in the new Marks. The food however, leaves a lot to be desired.

Louisa.

[Rosetta]

Think fig rolls are circa 45 pence at Lidl.

[DulwichFox]

Rosetta Wrote:

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

> Think fig rolls are circa 45 pence at Lidl.

Yes.. Home brands in super markets are 45-65p but are inferior to Mc Vities.

Londis is just expensive. ?1.89 as opposed to ?1.00 or indeed 99p is a big mark up.. I dont care how much their rent is.

DulwichFox

[*Bob*]

DulwichFox Wrote:

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

> Popped in to the Co-op today.. 13.15 ..The place

> is a disaster area...

>

> No croissants.. cinnamon swirls ... and other

> cakes.

>

> No bread / rolls . just some sliced bread..

>

> Depleted Veg. section.

>

> Pizza shelfs empty..

>

> Virtually no milk except flavoured stuff..

>

> No Customers.. No queues..

>

> They are suffering.. Cannot see them surviving.

Yeah I went in there yesterday, enticed by the 'no queues' and only needing a few things - but found it a slightly 'Soviet' shopping experience - so M&S it was. The lower footfall has clearly thrown their stocking into disarray, not that it was particularly great in the first place.

Whatever you think generally about the M&S store and teething troubles aside, it's got a proper air of 'well-thought through'. They've zero'd-in and they know what they're doing. The same can't be said for the Co-Op.

[Louisa]

*Bob* do you think a revamp will improve the co-op's fortunes as we head towards the party season Halloween to Christmas? How long before the Waitrose rumours start again at pace? So many questions, I know you're busy *Bob* but it would be interesting to hear your take on the whole thing.

Louisa.