London SE1 community website

Queen Elizabeth St Tesco Express

Join in these discussions today! Log in or register.
Current: 7 of 18
Tuesday 18 November 2014 2.14pm
My point is about the gradual decline in character of a designated conservation area (therefore "special") because of the arrival of low end commodity brands including, but not only, Tesco.

On the subject of Tesco, it's abject nonsense to say if people don't want it they won't use it. Of course many people who do object will use it once it's there - that's human nature. It doesn't mean that given the choice they would prefer it not to be there.

Tesco aside, all the other low end places I'm referring to will depend on a very high proportion of passing trade - not locals.

The real problem is the inability of planning law to control this blight.
Tuesday 18 November 2014 2.39pm
But it does mean (for those people who object) that their objection can't be anything more than a token objection.
Tuesday 18 November 2014 3.11pm
Not necessarily Gavin. From personal experience I've learned that much can be achieved on a case by case basis. Whether the outcome is an outright "win" or a compromise i.e. modification of a proposal. It's about getting involved.
Tuesday 18 November 2014 3.20pm
spacemaker wrote:
Of course many people who do object will use it once it's there - that's human nature.

Yes, human nature... more specifically, that element of human nature called hypocrisy.
Tuesday 18 November 2014 3.24pm
Tesco in the area is awful its plain and simple!! We do not need it!
Tuesday 18 November 2014 3.33pm
SD many thanks for your mature and intelligent contribution to the discussion…..
Friday 21 November 2014 10.08am
Morning all, I received the below email from Hamish.

Please follow the instructions and formally object to Tesco moving into the area- we need as many people as possible to fight it.

Dear residents,
As your locally elected ward councillors, it is our job to represent your views to the council and to act on the side of residents.

You may recall that we recently conducted a local opinion survey regarding Tesco’s proposals to open a new store on Queen Elizabeth Street.The response to that survey was overwhelmingly negative. Almost 80% of respondents oppose the plans.

We have, therefore, acted on your behalf to raise these concerns directly with Tesco and asked them to reconsider. Unfortunately, they have ignored the will of the community and have applied for planning permission for their store.

You can find full details about the application on the Southwark Council website, under the planning applications section and by searching for application number: 14/AP/4094.

Technically, the application is for the ‘Change of Use’ of part of the premises to allow it to be used for retail purposes. The identity of the applicant (ie, the fact it is a Tesco store which is proposed) is not directly relevant, the application is solely for the type of use rather than the user.

The application is now subject to a public consultation period (running until 6th December) which we, on your behalf, will be responding to. However, it is vital that as many local residents as possible also lodge their objections with the council directly.

There are strict limits to the sort of issues which can be considered by the planning committee and so it is important that letters of objection focus on these planning grounds.Where possible, it is also helpful to state which planning policies the proposal is contrary to. It is also important that everyone writesindividual objection letters, in your own words which cover the issues you feel are most relevant.

In order to assist people wishing to object, we have made a note below of some of the key issues which will be relevant:

Negativeeffect on the Conservation Area
Tesco’s application does not include the detailed elements of design, store façade, external advertising etc (which will be subject to future agreement between Tesco and the Council in the event that permission for the Change of Use is approved). However, comments could be made about the effect of the store on the local environment and the conservation area; especially any elements which are not in keeping with the existing style.

Shad Thames falls within the Tower Bridge Conservation Area; and Southwark Council has recently adopted the Shad Thames Conservation Areas Management Plan. Policy 3.15 of the Southwark Plan states that “Planning proposals that have an adverse effect on the historic environment will not be permitted.”

The Management Plan sets out a framework to protect, enhance and celebrate the features in and around Shad Thames which gave rise to its designation as a conservation area. In considering the above planning application, we have an excellent opportunity to put into practice the objectives set out in the Plan, in particular two key issues identified as the Plan’s practical focus:
o Being proactive in maintaining and enhancing the Management Area’s historic character and appearance.
o Managing future change to conserve and/or enhance the Management Area’s historic character and appearance
Noise and disturbance affecting local residents
Tesco’s application includes a noise impact assessment which concludes that there will only be a minimal impact. However, the scope of this report is limited to noise generated by the proposed internal plant room (ie, noise generated from their refrigerating and air conditioning units). You may wish to comment on likely noise and disturbance arising from deliveries, waste collection, staff and customer journeys to and from the store.

Policy 3.2 of the Southwark Plan states that: “Planning permission for development will not be granted where it would cause loss of amenity, including disturbance from noise, to present and future occupiers in the surrounding area or on the application site.”
Servicing, deliveries and waste
Tesco’s application envisages that servicing (ie, deliveries and waste collection) will take place from Curlew Street. This will involve the loss of car parking space and will impact on traffic management in the area.

Policy 5.2 of the Southwark Plan states that: “Planning permission will be granted for development unless: (ii)adequate provision has not been made for servicing, circulation and access to, from and through the site…”
There are, of course, many other planning policies or elements of the proposals which you may wish to mention and you should include anything which you feel is relevant.Other specific areas to focus your comments on are:
o Design and size of the development
o Use proposed
o Traffic generation and parking
o Will it be a nuisance because of noise etc
o Will it fit in with the surrounding area
o Will it affect my amenity in terms of daylight, privacy etc.
o How it complies with planning policies and guidance
o Possible Section 106 planning contributions or benefits for the community that could be secured from the proposal
Comments on the proposals should be sent to the Council by email to [email protected] and should clearly state the application number (14/AP/4094). The official consultation period runs until 6th December (although, in practice, the council will accept any comments made up until the date the decision is taken).
Finally, we are requesting that the decision must be taken by a Council Planning Committee (rather than by officers under ‘delegated powers’) this will give us the opportunity to make the case in person to the councillors taking the decision. This is a public meeting and all residents are strongly encouraged to attend – it makes the objection much more effective if councillors can see how many people feel strongly about the issue. We will circulate the date of the committee meeting as soon as it is confirmed.

If you have any further questions about the process for objecting, or wish to have any paper copies of this letter to pass on to friends and neighbours, then please don’t hesitate to contact us by emailing [email protected]

We will be in contact again when we know the date for the committee meeting.
Friday 21 November 2014 11.30am
I feel this clarification of the process highlights the difficulty some residents seem to having coming to terms with how they feel about the proposed store. It would appear that you cannot simply say a a collective group 'I want a shop but I don't want it to be a tesco'. Any store would have the same fascia/noise/litter problems. I think that vacant ground floor units are more detrimental to anywhere's 'atmosphere' than any shop, and I would think carefully before boycotting the change of use. The united voice of a community can, and should effect what buildings are used for, but selecting specific brands based on lifestyle choices is a gross overestimation of what is achievable or ethical.
Friday 21 November 2014 11.40am
I don't want another grocery store- simple as that.

There is a reason why the units are empty, and that is because the rent is very expensive. Tentazioni closed recently after their rent review because the increase in cost meant it wasn't worth continuing. Now that was a real loss to the community.
Friday 21 November 2014 12.49pm
barrierdickson wrote:
I feel this clarification of the process highlights the difficulty some residents seem to having coming to terms with how they feel about the proposed store. It would appear that you cannot simply say a a collective group 'I want a shop but I don't want it to be a tesco'. Any store would have the same fascia/noise/litter problems. I think that vacant ground floor units are more detrimental to anywhere's 'atmosphere' than any shop, and I would think carefully before boycotting the change of use. The united voice of a community can, and should effect what buildings are used for, but selecting specific brands based on lifestyle choices is a gross overestimation of what is achievable or ethical.

Welcome to the debate.

"Any store" etc. - that's simply untrue.
"Lifestyle choices" - Unclear to me what you mean in the context of this issue. Our objections are based on matters of fact - not matters of opinion.
"Achievable" - Much has been achieved down the years on various neighbourhood issues. Doing nothing is not an option.
"Ethical" - What ethics are you referring to?
Current: 7 of 18

To post a message, please log in or register..
We are part of
Independent Community News Network
Email newsletter

For the latest local news and events direct to your inbox every Monday, you need our weekly email newsletter SE1 Direct.

7,000+ locals read it every week. Can you afford to miss out?

Read the latest issue before signing up

Also on the forum
Views expressed in this discussion forum are those of the contributors and may not reflect the editorial policy of this website. Please read our terms and conditions