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

[Michael Palaeologus]

Quids, I am not wrong. You simply disagree, as it your right.

Given your proximity, you could perhaps turn your back lawn into a parking facility?

The pull of an M&S Food would more than outweigh the push of a CPZ.

[eddie]

I would like to know what an elected local councillor is doing entering into discussions with Waitrose about their options in opening a store in East Dulwich. On what authority does Councillor Barber do this?. To state that he has discussed with Waitrose options about taking over the Iceland store, or other buildings does not in my opinion fall within his remit. Iceland is a private business. So are all other businesses. Does this mean that Councillor Barber has identified other buildings that would suit Waitrose?. Buildings that are owned or leased by private individuals and private companies.

The big question is how has this been reflected in other local council decisions that are being taken. Councillor Barber appears to have been working on this for a long time as reflected in his ED Forum post starting 1st Jan 2011. His objection to the revised planning process, although deemed more cost effective and efficient, may not suit his agenda if he is unable to influence decisions like M&S taking over Iceland.

Local businesses are extremely concerned that local councillors, that are elected to represent us, appear to be in negotiations with other companies with a possible view to taking over their leases.

Councillor Barber has been asked to declare his interest in this matter on a number of occasions. He has failed to do so in a satisfactory manner. He uses the East Dulwich Forum endlessly for his own political agenda and maybe his own private dealings. I call on him to now clearly declare his interests in these matters and disclose what discussions he has had with Waitrose.

Eddie

[languagelounger]

Reimagine Your High Street

[Undisputedtruth]

Ever wondered why M&S customers think their food is so good? It has little to do with quality.

It seems M&S custmers can't do rational thinking.

Not sure why Cllr Barber is facing attacks. Surely he should be congratulated for bringing the current planning application to the wider community's attention. It is also good that Cllr Hamvas has taken an interest to avoid any political bias in the planning application consultation.

[OAKIE95]

I used to live in Clapham and always shopped at M&S....very good news.

[returnee]

*Bob* Wrote:

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

> But these won't just be lorries - these will be

> M&S lorries.

thank you for making me laugh *Bob* :))

[Lishyloo]

jamie3 Wrote: you sad little man

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

> Lishyloo Wrote:

>

> Stuff m&s if people on here think they are too

> good to shop in Iceland then they have serious

> issues with them selfs

>

> the-e-dealer Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Lushyloo ? Is there a published list of shops

> that

> > are ok to use? or are you making this up as you

> > go?

>

>

> Good try the-e-dealer. However, your basic mastery

> of posh stuff like grammar, syntax and spelling

> mark you out as someone who has serious issues

> with your selfs, and thus you do not merit a

> reply. Just be happy eating impossibly cheap food

> that massively increases your selfs chances of

> cancer and other serious health problems.

[StraferJack]

Brilliant. And when SE22 Is like Clapham, you can move again.. meanwhile...

[StraferJack]

By the by, lordship lane used to be known as hardship lane for a reason

By comparison with much of the country, the city, or the shires it's still doing better than many places

I would argue that one of the reasons for its competitive success is the worthies that quids do derides. It hasn't built any car parks in the last 20 years but has thrived. Because the people who have moved here have been the worthies he so decries

Lordship lane will wither when the car parks are built, the chains move in and the worthies move out. Then you will have the walworth road scenario.

[DulwichFox]

And the really good news..

There is still a M&S at Clapham Junction 37 Bus from E.D.

and a M&S Simply Food at Clapham South. 37 Bus from E.D. and short walk..

Must be worth it if M&S are that good

After all people come from Clapham to drink in E.D.

Fox

[????]

Where are all the car parks on the Walworth Road then SJ? Or Greenwich? And the one in Peckham was there yaers before they did the CPZ which killed off many shops in Rye Lane.

I would argue that one of the reasons for its competitive success is the worthies that quids do derides. It hasn't built any car parks in the last 20 years but has thrived. Because the people who have moved here have been the worthies he so decries

Guardian readers in unbelievably actually call that Gobsmakingly smug about themselves shocker...I am not worthy. You are a saint and saviour of the world.

Meanwhile, back in the real world.........

[????]

I just read that again.........F*ck me you've a high opinion of yourself

[????]

William Rose moved here because the congestion charge meant that they were worried their loyal customer base wouldn't drive to Kensington anymore FACT

The independent reatilaers on LL lane and its environs are overwhemingly against CPZ - and they work in a highly competitive business bloody hard against the high street chains FACT

The traffic levels on my road (one off North Cross and LL) are massively inflated on Saturdays so people are coming in by car Fact

Believe me, half the Village, half of SE24 and half of SE5 won't bother coming down here on a Saturday if they can't park - painful for you to believe that people are so heartlessly selfish as I'm sure it is.

You really think SE22 residents keep the whole Kaboodle going because you are worthy enough not to drive a car as you read they are bad things in The Guardian?

lol

[StraferJack]

You can be quite odd at times

My newspaper reading habit has sweet Fark all do do with anything, so you can give that a rest for a start. FACT

the local economy is very mixed and includes (and depends) on all kinds of punters

But to pretend it isn't anormal in terms of car use is just a bit wrong. You quite car usage stats from near your road like its some kind of revelation. It isn't.

But that doesn't make the area the same as, say west/east ham where EVERYONE drives to the local shopping centres or even the car parks near east ham high st

The ratio here is different. That's not a controversial statement is it? Why is that a high opinion of anyone, much less myself?

William rose complained about the congestion charge being death of his business? Turned out to be best thing that ever happened to him

What are you so upset about ?

[StraferJack]

Plus you are banging on about cpz or parking restrictions as if I'm FOR them. I have made no such argument. Any pro cpz thread in the past I have been against. Check them

[????]

I'm not upset just gobsmasked at your and othera naievety that will destroy the very thing you say you cherish round here

Ask the local independents Straefer, come on you know what they are saying already. They are the ones for whom a 10% decline in footfall may push them and their livelihoods over the edge.

What about Walworth Road?Peckham as a shopping area, certainly monocultured by parking restrictions than it used to be. Greenwich - they killed the market with parking restrictions and are now building a hotel/shopping complex (mmm, that'll be full of independents) opposite Cafe Rouge. Stiil, the parking fess and business rates are probably a nice earner for Greenwich Council so sod fucking up what used to be a lively, eclectic independent treasure.

I know you sooooooooooooo don't want it to be but many of your inner city contempories, including some who read the Guardian, and are foodies, and not horrible plebby oiks are just a tad more attached to their cars than you believe (*hope)

Over 40% of households in Newham don't have a car so you're a bit assumptive about East Ham and EVERYONE.

RE William Rose, yes of cousre it was. Moved dfrom an area that was anti-car driendly to one that wasn't....yet.

You idealists will wreck the fooking world given time

[????]

StraferJack Wrote:

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

> Plus you are banging on about cpz or parking

> restrictions as if I'm FOR them. I have made no

> such argument. Any pro cpz thread in the past I

> have been against. Check them

Er, what? I'm scratching my head totally bemused....So why the big tirade against my original post for attacking them?

[StraferJack]

Because mick p said "cpz or no" and you jumped all over him with

"MP you're wrong about CPZ. Whilst the smug admirable will walk or even jumpp on a bus and find it impossible to believe many people from SE21, Se24 and Se23 just won't bother popping down to LL if they can't park that easily anymore, it's not that much of a draw "

Like he was some deranged pro cpz nazi

My basic point is this area is slightly, but significantly, less car dependant than most other areas. That's not a bad thing. Making it more dependant would be a bad thing. Not lest because petrol is running out (or becoming more expensive at least)

[????]

Making it more dependant would be a bad thing.

...er...have I said build a multi-storey?

People will come to the area, CPZ or no. We have buses AND feet.

see my original argument against this point of MPs

You're the one doing the piling in and are now going "what? me guv?"

[Michael Palaeologus]

CPZ = decline in footfall? Where is the comparative analysis? There has been a significant decline in the economy for the past few years, that in itself will have reduced footfall.

Comparing footfall in recent times with footfall prior has to take into account these macro-economic factors.

[RosieH]

Wow, UDT, you found a film of Huguenot and MP? Kudos.

Undisputedtruth Wrote:

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

> Ever wondered why M&S customers think their food

> is so good? It has little to do with quality.

>

>

>

> It seems M&S custmers can't do rational thinking.

>

>

> Not sure why Cllr Barber is facing attacks. Surely

> he should be congratulated for bringing the

> current planning application to the wider

> community's attention. It is also good that Cllr

> Hamvas has taken an interest to avoid any

> political bias in the planning application

> consultation.

[*Bob*]

M&S and CPZs.

Could this thread possibly get any more Pavlovian?!

[KoolBananas]

Renata Hamvas Wrote:

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

> Hi Coolbananas,

> It depends on the distance from the development. I

> would suggest you respond to the consultation,

> details of how too are given in my last above, and

> encourage your neighbours to do so too.

>

> Renata

Hi Renata,

I'm a little confused and hope you can clarify something for me or indeed probably some others too. Are comments to an application limited to one per household or can numerous occupants respond? I don't mean sending in the same information but if there are different views and such. I can not find anything on the southwark council website to advise and I seem to recall some kind of restriction on these kind of things but I may be confusing myself with something else entirely and not even connected to the rules of planning applications in the UK!

[the-e-dealer]

No anybody and everyone can comment.

There are however very strict restrictions on who can speak at a planning meeting.

[Atticus]

any of that popcorn going spare ???s?