106 Lordship Lane planning application - Refused

[KalamityKel]

http://planningonline.southwark.gov.uk/AcolNetCGI.exe?ACTION=UNWRAP&RIPNAME=Root.PgeResultDetail&TheSystemkey=9549506

Once again the council are keeping things hush hush - only a small number of residents have been issued with consultation notification and NOT all those this will effect.

[edhistory]

Soup Dragon.

[StraferJack]

not sure what the problem is?

[edhistory]

Rear elevation proposal?

[susiq]

lets hope its another wine bar/eateree/estate agent. what does our local councilor have to say on this matter, has he been asked.

[Earl Aelfheah]

oooh an estate agents would be great. Or and indian take away.

[Sue]

Class A3 restaurant according to the planning application.

Anybody know what/who it will be?

[Earl Aelfheah]

I recall a thread about the closure of Soupdragon which suggested the Leaseholder was raising their rent as the result of interest from (da, da, daaaa) 'The chains'. Of course, that could have just been a negotiating tactic on behalf of a greedy landlord, rather than anything substantial. I guess we'll find out soon enough.

[Louisa]

Looking at the pictures which were not previously visible on the application, I would hazard a guess at a chain such as Wagamama/Strada/Zizzi. The floor plan looks familiar.

Louisa.

[StraferJack]

Blandalanda

But I would say this - if you get a chain like that up that end of LL, it will drag an awful lot more people up that way and should have a good knockon effect for other business up there (if anyone does take over the Mag for example....)

[Louisa]

I retract my previous suggestion. I've now read the applicants mission statement and I quote; "106 Lordship Lane will be East Dulwich's first truly continental Cafe Brasserie drawing on an abundance of culinary traditions - with a focus on the Mediterranean, it will strive to surprise and stir, and will do this using bold flavours from the Middle East to Italy, and onto Spain."

It goes on to finish with; "Our family have been residents of the area for many years, and have long term personal and business ties with East Dulwich. We know the area and it's people and we feel that the restaurant will be a great independent business addition to our locality".

http://planningonline.southwark.gov.uk/DocsOnline/Documents/303654_1.pdf

Louisa.

[edhistory]

Everyone's noted the agent's use of a well out of date Ordnance Survey plan that does not show the current location of adjacent residential buildings?

Might be regarded as misleading.

John K

[UncleBen]

Not another eaterie! How much can the middle classes and their sprogs gorge?

[DiscoDex]

Just what Lordship needs, another restaurant and 1 less shop.....not!

I really hope the council do the right thing and kick this application out as can't see this will help other struggling restaurant businesses in the area. Also it's such a shame to lose what was a really great little childrens shop and upstars was baby classes etc....which I know lots of mum n dads in the area had found to be such a great asset on the Lane.

As for the out of date plans attached to the application I find that most amusing as that sight line at the back of 106LL changed over 10-12 years ago when the 110 Club was demolished and Sage Mews was constructed! A bit naughty me thinks whoever submitted this application on this basis!!

My vote would be a definite no.

[Jeremy]

DiscoDex Wrote:

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

> Also it's such a shame to lose what was a

> really great little childrens shop and upstars was

> baby classes etc....which I know lots of mum n

> dads in the area had found to be such a great

> asset on the Lane.

That may well be the case, but the business has now gone so surely it's irrelevant to the application?

[Cora]

I think neighbours should be VERY WARY of (from memory) a rear elevation roof terrace and street table space.....Can't see how the council could allow a business to do this right next to housing...

[bemusED]

Cora Wrote:

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

> I think neighbours should be VERY WARY of (from

> memory) a rear elevation roof terrace and street

> table space.....Can't see how the council could

> allow a business to do this right next to

> housing...

Cora, the plans don't appear to show either.

there is a small area at the rear in timber decking, for outdoor seating at ground level, probably smaller than that at the Blue Mountain.

onto the street there is only space for a small ramp outside the frontage.

the more unusual proposal is a small terrace to the street at first floor level above the frontage. can't think of any examples of that on the lane. the elevations and plan indicate an obscured glazed screen to both sides, whether this is enough to appease local residents only time will tell. I have only glanced at the plans on my phone but assume the applicant is proposing suitably restrictive hours when this could be used.

[DiscoDex]

Looking at the details of the application the hours proposed for all parts (inc. new terrace at front/new decking at rear) are 9am till 11pm.

Given the size of area indicated as 'bar' on the proposed new floorplans I also wonder if they've submitted application for change of use to a 'cafe brasserie' and down the line plan is in the evenings to have more of a 'bar' type feel?

Either way, surely examples like Locale et al show that LL has enough restaurants/bars and show how important it is to keep units that offer retail or other services for local residents. Just walking up and down LL on the average evening shows how similar local businesses are really struggling right now to do enough covers to stay afloat.

[Jeremy]

Dex, you're right there are only so many restaurants an area can sustain. If it's really great or different then it might possibly attract people from outside the area, but this one doesn't exactly sound revolutionary. But we'll see.

[StraferJack]

Locale closing shouldn't be used as an example of an area not sustaining restaurants - it had it's supportes but was largely a moribund experience, and it is being replaced by another restaurant - a place which is sounding a lot more interesting

You could have pointed to The Wishing Well in peckham and The Uplands in ED as indicators of the lack of demand for pubs - but they got taken over by different people and are busier by a factor of umpteen

I don't like the way the old toy shop was moved on and I think I've had run-ins with the owner on here before about that whole episode, but for the life of me I have no idea why people are getting so worked up about it's conversion to a cafe/bar/restaurant. Good luck to them. If you don't like the look of it, don't go

[ed_pete]

Hear, hear SJ, given the choice between an empty premise and one that's providing employment, buying from other businesses and paying taxes, I know which one I'd prefer to see.

How's the economy ever going to get back on it's feet if entrepreneurs are discouraged from starting new businesses ? OK - I don't know if that's actually the case in this instance but you get the gist.

Bear in mind that anyone can comment on a planning application, not just the statutory consultees.

[SCSB79]

Well said SJ and ed_p, it is amazing to see people against the possible improvement to the area.

I think a lot of people on here just like to moan for the sake of moaning.

[Jeremy]

Not against another restaurant per se. Good luck to them. But as DD says, walking along LL during the week, so many of the places are pretty empty. It seems we have too much quantity and not enough quality.

As with SJ's pub example, if new places opening up manage to raise the bar, then I'm sure they'll do well.

[KalamityKel]

I'm not against the business prospect but I'm not keen on the change of use part. Once it's changed...

Nor the idea to have a kitchen upstairs to the rear - it's bad enough having the burnt oily fumes from the Curry Cabin taking over the area at all times of day/into late evening without adding to it. Neighbouring residents will not be pleased. AND using the rear space with more windows will certainly add strain to residents being overlooked - more so than when Soup Dragon held classes upstairs.

Nor the use of the alley way for service - it's too narrow for vehicles, the house which sits on one side to it has windows that open outwards narrowing the space further...I also believe the house in question has their "official" street door on the side although the door on Chesterfield Grove is now used due to past issues. They would be within their rights to kick up a fuss. The Funeral directors stopped using the alleyway many years ago because of the narrowness and issues with the neighbouring house.

It's all well and good to declare in an application they know the area well but it would be nice if this was actually demonstrated in the application!

[Louisa]

I would personally support the idea of quality over quantity. We already have an abundance of Mediterranean style/themed restaurants in the area and a lack of any quality in that type of restaurant. If this is another mediocre restaurant then it wouldn't do this areas reputation any good, if its offering something unique and different then good luck to them - its long overdue. I personally am slightly disappointed no bigger chains have not opted to come into the area which would increase footfall and encourage existing businesses. I fear for the future of lordship lane currently because chains have more reasons not to come here than to come here. Slightly different reasons but if the opposition to M&S is anything to go by it doesn't bode well for the future of our high street.

Louisa.