Jump to content

Recommended Posts

puzzled,


you may not yet have gathered that the application is not about the brand of store...that is certainly not an issue on which it could or would be rejected by planning. It is the detail of the application, things like health and safety, boundaries,the size and scale of the buildings mooted, that have resulted in the rejection of the application. It fails to meet planning requirements.

I would say that most (but not all) would like to see a M+S food in East Dulwich. Surely they need to go back to the drawing board and come up with a different plan, particularly for the offices/ flats on the upper floors. Presumably it isn't the fact that it is M+S just the plans for the design for the upper floors and the issues with the deliveries. Can't they keep the delivery area the same as currently - presumably that would be acceptable to the residents and if M+S want more space use the 2nd floor as shop space or storage/ freezer space. That would then not create any parking issues either. Or are they being greedy and want the money from the flats ?
No survey ... just having read most of the 42 pages worth of posts on this forum over the last year. I did say most but not all, and I did say in East Dulwich, not necessarily instead of Iceland to try and avoid a M+S vs. Iceland discussion. It would be interesting for someone to do an independent survey - I don't think there has been one as part of the application process - can we have a vote on this forum ?

If the footprint and height of a new application was the same as the existing building, so that attempts were not being made to squeeze much more out of the same space, and the amount and timing of delivery/ vehicles was no different from those for Icleand, then I don't think residents would care who the shop brand was.


Goose what is your motivation for a vote??? The application has not been turned down on the basis that it is M&S.

john k et al


why would anyone not want m&s on lordship lane? they are anong the nost desired retail presences in the uk.


let us have your objections...... without the socio-policital prejudices.


as a retailer myself, I can tell you we all want them in.

puzzled Wrote:

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

> john k et al

>

> why would anyone not want m&s on lordship lane?

> they are anong the nost desired retail presences

> in the uk.

>

> let us have your objections...... without the

> socio-policital prejudices.


Why me?


I have no objections to M&S coming to Lordship Lane.


My preference would be for M&S to take the Foxtons building.


John K

I care what shops are on my local high street, 'cause that's where I shop. Not deeply, but I care.


Otta Wrote:

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

> why would anyone not want m&s on lordship lane?

>

>

>

> Why would anyone really care that much?

Worker Wrote:

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

> I care what shops are on my local high street,

> 'cause that's where I shop. Not deeply, but I

> care.

>

> Otta Wrote:

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

> -----

> > why would anyone not want m&s on lordship lane?

> >

> >

> >

> > Why would anyone really care that much?



Cool, I just found puzzled's post funny. Like they couldn't believe that anyone in the world would not desperately want an M&S.

Anyone heard if they are willing to change the redevelopment plans or will M&S abandon the idea if they can't get the extra space required by expanding into the parking lot?


Didn't James mention at the beginning of the thread that Waitrose would take the space as is (presumably for less rent)? What are the prospects of Iceland now remaining or the site becoming vacant?


Any news / gossip welcome!

the least surprising post was from the almighty james barber who does not like the idea of 24-hours co-op shopping. he appears not to like the idea of m&s either although it is difficult to pin him down on definitive answers. barber is a councillor for a ward. he is not in any position of power, thank god. he is very good on little local issues, but for god's sake keep him away from anything big

I am assuming that Iceland is still planning to close in Lordship Lane? - which means that we will lose a significant shop without gaining another - so those who resisted the plans will now be living amidst a blighted high street - perhaps we can have another charity shop there?


As the rot sets in, the Co-op will probably re-think its opening policy - why invest resource in a failing area? - and so it will go.


At least, when nobody wants to come here, parking will ease - and we will all need cars to drive out to where there are shops.


So, well done everybody, job done!

I am astonished at penguin68's bonkers that lordship lane is failing. the determination of m&s to open up here in spite of the barber's of this world is clear evidence that this magnificent shopping street is surviving and soon once again thriving.

Every occasion has tipping points. The blocking of the plans for the Iceland site seems to have stemmed from objections about deliveries and about the loss of the parking amenity behind the store ? both would be necessary to M&S?s operation ? the storage area behind the store now is far too small ? fine for the Iceland model of storing everything in freezers in-store, but not for the M&S model which requires better (less intensive) in-store display. [i doubt whether flats in place of offices will have caused that much of a planning problem, considering the shortage of living accommodation across London].


So no Iceland, no M&S, one of the largest retail spaces on the road empty (or a charity shop) ? (with another large space already a charity shop) ? suddenly LL starts to look blighted, and destination shops such as M&S (or Waitrose) don?t move into blighted retail areas. A smooth transition between Iceland and M&S wouldn?t have been an issue ? but I doubt M&S will be seeking another site, once its sees the gaping hole in the street that ex-Iceland will be.


In a time of slow economic growth companies such as M&S invest in certainties, they don?t speculate ? and LL is now looking like a retail basket case. It?s still good for eating and drinking ? and it may remain a revelling destination ? but as a shopping street this could have been the nail in the coffin. There are lots of areas that are full of middle class 30 somethings who will spend money at high-end grocers ? and many of these are also not full of Nimbys trying to keep nasty commerce away from them.


That?s where M&S (and Waitrose) will go, and good luck to them. We have sown, now we can reap.

I wonder if those that object to the application on the basis of parking pressures are aware of the many other applications for additional rooms, new houses or B&B's currently pending or already approved for ED? The level of upset with this application seems disproportionate.


Good to see the EDT planning to set up B&B rooms though. Presume the guests will not have cars.

Penguin68 Wrote:

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

.. as a shopping street this could have been the nail in the coffin.



So what you're saying is that apart from the butcher, the various greengrocers (traditional, specialist) the fishmonger, the wine shops, the diy shop, the post office, the stationers and card shops, the banks, the various clothes shops, the delicatessen, the specialist cheese shop, all packed into about 150 yeards - apart from these - because we don't have ready access to Cheese Tasters and aspirational food for terminally lazy - we're doomed?



I think we'll be ok. (I will miss the Cheese Tasters though)

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

    • I think it's connected with the totem pole renovation celebrations They have passed now, but the notice has been there since then (at least that's when I first saw it - I passed it on the 484 and also took a photo!)
    • Labour was damned, no matter what it did, when it came to the budget. It loves go on about the black hole, but if Labour had had its way, we'd have been in lockdown for longer and the black hole would be even bigger.  Am I only the one who thinks it's time the NHS became revenue-generating? Not private, but charging small fees for GP appts, x-rays etc? People who don't turn up for GP and out-patient appointments should definitely be charged a cancellation fee. When I lived in Norway I got incredible medical treatment, including follow up appointments, drugs, x-rays, all for £200. I was more than happy to pay it and could afford to. For fairness, make it somehow means-tested.  I am sure there's a model in there somewhere that would be fair to everyone. It's time we stopped fetishising something that no longer works for patient or doctor.  As for major growth, it's a thing of the past, no matter where in the world you live, unless it's China. Or unless you want a Truss-style, totally de-regulated economy and love capitalism with a large C. 
    • If you read my post I expect a compromise with the raising of the cap on agricultural property so that far less 'ordinary' farmers do not get caught  Clarkson is simply a high profile land owner who is not in the business as a conventional farmer.  Here's a nice article that seems to explain things well  https://www.sustainweb.org/blogs/nov24-farming-budget-inheritance-tax-apr/ It's too early to speculate on 2029.  I expect that most of us who were pleased that Labour got in were not expecting anything radical. Whilst floating the idea of hitting those looking to minimise inheritance tax, including gifting, like fuel duty they also chickened put. I'm surprised that anyone could start touting for the Tories after 14 years of financial mismanagement and general incompetence. Surly not.  A very low bar for Labour but they must be well aware that there doesn't need to be much of a swing form Reform to overturn Labour's artificially large majority.  But even with a generally rabid right wing press, now was the opportunity to be much braver.
    • And I worry this Labour government with all of it's own goals and the tax increases is playing into Farage's hands. With Trump winning in the US, his BFF Farage is likely to benefit from strained relations between the US administration and the UK one. As Alastair Campbell said on a recent episode of The Rest is Politics who would not have wanted to be a fly on the wall of the first call between Angela Rayner and JD Vance....those two really are oil and water. Scary, scary times right now and there seems to be a lack of leadership and political nous within the government at a time when we really need it - there aren't many in the cabinet who you think will play well on the global stage.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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