Revised new - M&S planning application to replace Iceland..

[HelBel65]

>>>People don't want property prices to rise even further. The only people who would benefit are people who leave the area.

What people? With respect, you're not speaking for me. I have no plans to leave the area but if in the meantime my flat goes up in value because of improvements to the area, why would I mind? It's my greatest asset after all (and my pension, being self employed) and I worked really hard to get it!

Anyway, sorry let's stick to the development itself....I just wanted to respond to a particular post. H

[James]

I have to say, this argument that says "Where will the poor people get their food if there's no Iceland" is flawed in several ways.

Firstly, the price of food as a % of household income has dramatically declined since the 50s, thanks largely to aggressive pricing at the supermarkets. If people are struggling to make ends meet, there are many other areas to consider first (the Sky subscription? Expensive car? Mobile phone? Designer clothes?)

I don't wish to generalise by any means but it does amaze me how often people who claim not to be able to afford paying a few pence more for better food can still afford an iPhone 5 etc (I can't!) I think it's more about priorities than necessity to be honest.

[Jeremy]

I think I'm speaking for everyone except property investors or people who are planning to leave.

If you're not going to leave the area, you're either planning to keep your flat, or trade up. In the first scenario your profit is not realised, in the second scenario you would be worse off.

Not to mention the people who grew up here and would like to stay. Or people who are renting and would like to buy.

So the gentrification process is all well and good, but the associated rise in property prices only benefit the minority.

[HelBel65]

>>>>>>I think I'm speaking for everyone except property investors or people who are planning to leave.<<<<<<

Well I'm neither, so you're not speaking for me, are you?

Sorry, just not a fan of sweeping generalisations!

[macrobana]

HelBel65 Wrote:

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

> I have no plans to leave the area but if in

> the meantime

[Earl Aelfheah]

Iceland is a false economy. Individual items may carry a low ticket price, but that isn't the same as saying they are good value. When you actually analyse what you are getting for you money in terms of the nutritional value of many (not all) of their offerings, it's could actually be considered very expensive. Adding in the cost to health of eating heavilly processed foods off balances the equation further. M&S isn't a whole lot better to be fair, but if you want value, then one can buy relatively low cost cuts of meat and plenty of cheap vegatables from many of the nearby independents and street markets.

Iceland / M&S are both chains specialising primarilly in heavilly processed, pre-prepared foods. The latter has a mildly better quality offering, so I would prefer it personally, but it's all much of a muchness.

To hold Iceland up as some kind of working class hero is silly though.

[macrobana]

rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> Iceland is a false economy.

Assertion.

[the-e-dealer]

Iceland is a f*cked Economy.

[Dulwich Squirrel]

To be frank, I just can't understand why anybody would not welcome the introduction of M&S into Lordship Lane. The demographic of the area is changing no end and I think the reality is that most people would welcome the quality that M&S offers. Fingers crossed that the application is accepted!

[*Bob*]

I hope everyone has familiarised themselves with the first 38 pages before posting.

We wouldn't want to go over old ground on this one, would we?

[mrure26]

To be frank, I just can't understand why anybody would not welcome the introduction of M&S into Lordship Lane. The demographic of the area is changing no end and I think the reality is that most people would welcome the quality that M&S offers. Fingers crossed that the application is accepted!

I find this quite snobbish. Are you saying that all in East Dulwich are well heeled and upmarket. Reality check - Not everyone can afford M&S.

[LondonMix]

Indeed. We've gone through the class war part of the discussion several pages ago...

*Bob* Wrote:

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

> I hope everyone has familiarised themselves with

> the first 38 pages before posting.

>

> We wouldn't want to go over old ground on this

> one, would we?

[charles26]

>charles26, do you live in the street right next to the car wash? Just wondering? Most people in the street affected are aware of cars being badly damaged as well as residential property (garden walls have been knocked down) by delivery vehicles. Again, no objection to M&S it is the overall development which seeks to squeeze much, much more into the same space.<

ed has a population of thousands, we cant make decisions based on the preferences of just a few on one street. possible solution would be to reroute the vehicles via main roads only. this seems a plausible request if the noise and damage is that bad on chesterfield grove and/or neighboring residential streets

[charles26]

whilst they are at it they should get rid of the co-op and replace that with a waitrose? that will really push the penny savers over the edge. i love waitrose but my god what a rip off.

[macrobana]

charles26 Wrote:

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

> possible solution would be to

> reroute the vehicles via main roads only. this

> seems a plausible request

Deliveries through front entrance.

[simonethebeaver]

James Wrote:

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

> I have to say, this argument that says "Where will

> the poor people get their food if there's no

> Iceland" is flawed in several ways.

>

> Firstly, the price of food as a % of household

> income has dramatically declined since the 50s,

> thanks largely to aggressive pricing at the

> supermarkets. If people are struggling to make

> ends meet, there are many other areas to consider

> first (the Sky subscription? Expensive car? Mobile

> phone? Designer clothes?)

>

> I don't wish to generalise by any means but it

> does amaze me how often people who claim not to be

> able to afford paying a few pence more for better

> food can still afford an iPhone 5 etc (I can't!) I

> think it's more about priorities than necessity to

> be honest.

I think there are actually people around here we could call 'poor' who don't have much money for food OR designer clothes, an expensive car, a Sky subscription or a posh mobile phone. We're not talking Daily Mail middle class poverty but actual low incomes. I'm not saying that Iceland is the only answer to buying food on a budget but can we remember that there are people living in East Dulwich still who genuinely don't have much money. It's not about prioritising M&S food over designer clothing, but only having a state pension or income support to shop on.

[Lowlander]

charles26 Wrote:

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

> whilst they are at it they should get rid of the

> co-op and replace that with a waitrose? that will

> really push the penny savers over the edge. i love

> waitrose but my god what a rip off.

The same Waitrose who price-match Tesco?

[first mate]

charles26,

It is just that you spoke about a personal preference for an M&S, ergo it suits you. The point is that the potential impact of the TOTAL development on those living closest to it weighs in at rather more than a yen for some quality,M&S grub.

The development is more than just a shop....

[*Bob*]

first mate Wrote:

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

> The development is more than just a shop....

"... it's an M&S shop."

(sorry)

[first mate]

*Bob*

:)

[Chillaxed]

Sorry first mate, but you're also expressing a personal opinion i.e. the impact of the development is more important than a desire for some posh cheese sticks. For most of ED, the personal impact of the development will be very limited and will not weigh heavily on their decision to support or object.

[first mate]

Chillaxed,

Of course I am, but I do not assert that my view is of greater importance, though I will try to argue why it is important.

[LondonMix]

I'd say its of greater importance because its the only thing the planning dept will consider for better or worse....

I believe this application will be successful but we should scrutinize it so the final project is as good as it can be.

[first mate]

London Mix, actually you are spot on, planning have no interest in the brand of shop and this will have no bearing on their decision on the application. The only objections they will consider and weigh in the balance, are to do with the detail of the application. For these reasons I would urge people to read the application and to comment, having considered its implications.

[charles26]

Lowlander Wrote:

> The same Waitrose who price-match Tesco?

Seriously? Thats bizarre, i must have just felt like everything was over priced because the store is by appointment to her majesty!