New out of town shop on East Dulwich Road

[the-e-dealer]

Er East Dulwich Road is NOT GREEN BELT!

[DaveR]

I looked at the application docs. I couldn't see anything to get excited about. The proposed change of use is ground floor only, retaining the existing building and parking spaces (the latter for use by office occupants only), putting in bike storage, no other significant change. Traffic and parking is already busy in the immediate area, but that suggests to me that this will not have a signficant impact - who is going to drive to a shop knowing that there will be nowhere to park?

As for "a new shop away from our high streets", the site is pretty much equidistant from the existing E Dulwich Rd shops and the top of LL, and on the main road. I can't see the objection.

[Cardiffgirl]

If you are worried about the impact the proposal will have on LL ask the applicant to provide an impact assessment. I can't comment on how businesses are trading but from a qualitative perspective LL does appear to be quite vibrant. I appreciate applications like this cause concern but I think rather than blanket oppose them, establish the facts (i.e. why cant the operator go to LL which is a material planning consideration , and what impact will this application have on the trading for business along LL i.e. how much trade will it divert) and then reach an opinion. As being mentioned on this thread, the application will help bring investment and jobs to the centre, and it is a little disconcerting that such investment is being objected to before the facts are established. The first priority is to protect LL, but unless you look at all the facts you could end up preventing investment coming forward that would actually benefit the centre. Of course, this exercise may demonstrate that the impact will be damaging, but at least it would be based on evidence.

[James Barber]

Hi Cardiffgirl,

You're right we need more informaiton BUT no one had spotted the planning application. Without any objections it would definately not be given the scrutiny of a planning committee. Officers could grant it permission and last time I looked no neighoburs wer going to be consulted.

So objecting in it in itself doesnt stop a planning application but it does ensure it is properly and fully scutinised.

If it reaches a planning committee and all the evidence you suggest says it would be a fab addition to the area fine.

But the first step is ensuring it receives proper scrutiny. This may be different process thant you're used to.

Hi DaveR,

But if it resulted in Lordship Lane shops going bust would you still support it or comnsider it trivial?

[Cardiffgirl]

Of course neighbouring properties should be consulted, but I think that perhaps you should give planning officers at Southwark some credit to know what they are doing? To fully assess a planning application doesn't immediately mean it has to go to planning committee; and given the scale of the proposals it would be normal for such an application to be determined under delegated powers. Officers at LPAs across the country are capable of making informed, correct planning decisions without it be determined at committee level.

[James Barber]

I've sat on enough planning committees to have seen bad recommendations from officers and bad use of delegated powers by officers and I'm sure Cardiffgirl as a planning officer you've seen plenty of daft councillor decisions.

But the point is when officers make planning decisions they make them under delegated powers from councillors.

I'm personally not happy when officers are going to make decisions with potentially huge and far reaching impacts on our community. I'd sooner give local residents a chance to sit before a committee and say why they oppose or support a scheme and hear the developer explain why their scheme is a good thing. And as a councillor speak for or against a scheme. This extra hurdle often ensures much more thorough scruntiny of a planning applcation than a planning officer sitting in SE1 and their counter signing manager alone.

[EDmummy]

Perfect site for key worker housing!

[Jeremy]

You don't have to agree with everything James B says or does (I know I don't), but some of the abuse dished out to him on here is completely out of order.

[Chillaxed]

James Barber Wrote:

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

> On this forum I'm one of the very few people who

> ARE accountable - every four years the first

> Thursday in May.

Good point, whatever your view of local politics and politicians.

Though I guess Sue also gets held to account at every Goose Is Out gig.

[Cardiffgirl]

First, just to confirm I am not a planning officer.

Second, no abuse intended so sorry if I have offended - It is just frustrating as a local resident to see potential investment not coming forward without proper consideration as a result of fear into development proposals rather than full consideration to both positive and negative arguments and a proper assessment based on a balance of these.

Finally, I understand as a Cllr for Southwark you have a right to call a decision in, or seek to try and ensure this happens, so I guess as my ward Cllr I am asking you to try and ensure a decision is made with all available information provided at this stage, so a sensible decision can be made as soon as possible rather than resulting in a position which just frustrates any investment in to the area.

[LondonMix]

Agree

Cardiffgirl Wrote:

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

> First, just to confirm I am not a planning

> officer.

>

> Second, no abuse intended so sorry if I have

> offended - It is just frustrating as a local

> resident to see potential investment not coming

> forward without proper consideration as a result

> of fear into development proposals rather than

> full consideration to both positive and negative

> arguments and a proper assessment based on a

> balance of these.

>

> Finally, I understand as a Cllr for Southwark you

> have a right to call a decision in, or seek to try

> and ensure this happens, so I guess as my ward

> Cllr I am asking you to try and ensure a decision

> is made with all available information provided at

> this stage, so a sensible decision can be made as

> soon as possible rather than resulting in a

> position which just frustrates any investment in

> to the area.

[the-e-dealer]

So the Brain cells tell me CG is A Council officer Related to Gary the Electrician and spends too much on hair care!

[neilson99]

Not sure I would necessarily agree that there is finite money in the local economy. Surely if a developer invests in the site they would pump in a good few quid which has probably come from their account outside of the area. This investment will deliver jobs in terms of the re development and then on an ongoing basis to operate the site. I might even decide to get off my lazy arse and walk to the supermarket and spend there, rather than buy over the Internet where my money probably ends up in some offshore tax haven in Tuvalu or Ireland.

Fair enough if the comments have been aimed a little too personally at James I'll apologise. I'm not a Lib Dem but work brings me into contact wih a number of politicians - I do think kudos should be given to James for his proactive and consistent outreach to his constituents and for better or worse he does express a view and an opinion when many of our electeds hide behind spin and bland PR. It's rare and to be applauded.

I do think that some basis for the opinion should be with full knowledge of the facts in hand tho, otherwise we might as well go and ask the next person we're stood by at the bus stop for all the use it would be. At best it comes across as I'll informed gossip, at worst it could make one wonder if there is another agenda at play here.

[dbboy]

James, as you said "I've sat on enough planning committees to have seen bad recommendations from officers and bad use of delegated powers by officers",

Am I not right in saying that it is the Councillors who make you have the power to accept or reject planning applications and a whole lot more besidese based on the recommendations made by planning officers. They do the baackground work, councillors listen to the pros and cons and vote on what they "believe" is the best outcome. As councillors, remember we have given you the power to represent us by voting you and your peers into office.

[the-e-dealer]

But they are not acting as Councillors. They are acting as independant Judges

[DJKillaQueen]

James, you?ve completely lost the plot this time I?m afraid and none of your arguments make any sense until we know what kind of trade the retail unit will be. How on earth do you know if it will be competition for the same pool of disposable income and customers as other shops? And even if it East Dulwich Road competes with Lordship Lane...so what? We don't all live off Lordship Lane.

I am someone who rarely shops in LL but regularly shops on EDR. ED is not an enclave, cut off from the surrounding wards of London. Since when did it gain this devine right to have preference over the economy of neighbouring streets, businesses and communities?

Utterly ridiculous.

[James Barber]

Hi dbboy,

You are partially correct. Councillors do sit on Planning Committees but the councils constitution decides which schemes go t oa committee of councillors and which do not and the conditions between the two. Eitherway, I would never sit on a planning committee I had preconceived ideas about a scheme.

Hi DJKQ,

If you ask EDR shops whether they want a competitor 200m away they'll say no. The parade of shops etc on EDR find it hard enough to exist without diluting trade further.

Yes, you're quite right I was having a bad day/week when I did the original post and I regret it not being more balanced as I like to think other threads I've been involved with.

Hi Cardiffgirl,

Yes I have he right to ask for a call-in but its not automatic. The hurdles for this are much higher now. The chair of the main planning committee has to agree after consulting with the lead council official for planning whether they agree and two councillors have to request it in the first place. Hence my concern it might just slip through witohut proper scrutiny. If it is successfully called-in it then would go to either Planning sub-committee A or B when non local Dulwich councillors would decide. Before May 2011 it would have gone to a Planning Committee of local Dulwich councillors.

[DJKillaQueen]

Of course established businesses don't want competition, that's a no brainer, but one that if we listened to it, means we'd never have had any new businesses in the area, ever.

Consumers on the other hand do sometimes want new businesses, if they are the right ones, because they increase choice and jobs. And just as new businesses can increase competition, they can also bring new customers into a street, from which other retailers benefit - so it can go either way.

For all we know, the applicant might after all, want to open a new type of business to the area (I'm hoping for Poundland ;) but Waitrose might be looming - who knows). And at some point they'd have to apply for a licence to do so, which is when we find out that detail. The application is located approximate to an already retail based area. I really can't see any issue with it.

[Pugwash]

I agree with James that some council officers make bad decisions and do not check their facts. Many years ago, the Dulwich Medical Centre wanted to expand to a neighbouring community facility and made enquiries to Southwark Council. Officers there informed DMC that the premises were used for a few hours in the morning by around 20 children, and since it was council owned premises, they felt that DMC had a good chance of being able to purchase the site.A petition was drawn up with over 2 ( or was it 3) thousand names on it from local people who wanted to retain that facility. What the council officer did not check was that this was a vibrant community centre used by over 500 people a week from 9 am - late night 6/7 days a week. The then leader of the council was asked questions in the Town Hall and it transpired that the council officer was more moved by the possible sale of a valuable piece of land,than to checking out facts. They had visited the centre whilst the morning playgroup was in session and decided that a play group was an insignificant user of the premises and could easily be disbanded or find alternative premises.

[Oopnorthpup]

See the site is currently being fitted out to sell Christmas Trees (absolutely no objection to this) but also includes caravan & trailer. Not sure if this requires any sort of planning permission, but the caravan is an eyesore...any idea on how to determine if they have permission?

[Oopnorthpup]

See the site is currently being fitted out to sell Christmas Trees (absolutely no objection to this) also includes caravan & trailer. Not sure if this requires any sort of planning permission, but the caravan is an eyesore...any idea on how to determine if they have permission?

[DJKillaQueen]

The Caravan and Trailer may only be temporary while the refitting is taking place (although odd this should already be happening if a change of use hasn't yet been granted). They would also need a licence to trade on the site and without an application for one of those...no trading whatsoever should be taking place yet.

Have a look on the southwark licensing website and see if there is an active trading licence in place, or an application for one.

Whilst I have no objection to another retail site I do have an objection to one that doesn't follow the correct procedures for planning and licensing.

[PeckhamRose]

Oooh I hope it is a Wetherspoon....

And define 'High Street'. There's shops all over the place.

[Jeremy]

Selfridges Express / Harrods Simply Food.

[DiD]

I think we should be pleased with a politician who is prepared to take a stance on something -- remember the days when politicians weren't just mediators, but had views? That's the only way we CAN hold them to account. The libdems, of course, are now getting a knocking because they went against their manifesto in the coalition gov't and they will pay a hefty price in the next election because of it.

Regarding the application process, if they haven't stated what its going to be, don't the planning officers have to return the application unapproved unless it has sufficient information on which to base a decision for the local community? And if not, WHY not? If a neighbour is applying to extend their property, they have to let me know exactly what they're going to do and how the space will be used. Surely commercial space should be the same?