RUMOURS: CINEMA AND NANDOS COMING TO SYDENHAM

[ptmartin]

Chris

Thanks for your swift reply.

I don't doubt that there will be logistical issues with access, loading and parking but would surely hope that there could be a will to find a simple solution to what must be frequently-encountered problems.

I guess in the end chicken and chips is chicken and chips, whether it is sold by Nandos or Chicken Cottage, although guess the price point and family demographic of the former is different. To see this through the prism of the council's obesity strategy (park the need for that being a major focus for a council for one moment) seems to me to be not seeing the bigger picture I was highlighting; that a national restaurant chain must have a chance of exterting positive pull to others, to the positive benefit of the area. To cloud this with A5 ratios seems to me to miss the point.

I don't mean to be overly-critical of the High Street and realise that many are working hard to ensure it is maximised, but filling empty shops is one thing; what they are filled with is another and we do seem to have a high concentration of pound shops, poor corner shops, estate agents and bookmakers.

Anyhow, I do thank you for taking the time and trouble to respond; particularly so quickly. Whilst I am sure the Sydenham Society does some fantastic work, it doesn't speak for every strand of local opinion. I know that many of my neighbours would be delighted to see this resolved to hopefully begin the process of us having a high street that successfully mixes national brands and specialist local shops.

With best wishes

Philip

[prince]

Hello Philip

Many thanks for your email. The planning application is for

The change of use of the existing two units from A1/A2 use to A3 use (restaurants and cafés) at 301-303 Kirkdale SE26, together with the creation of an additional entrance from Spring Hill.

Within the application was the request for a 10 metre loading bay on Spring Hill for deliveries.

I welcome the addition of another A3 restaurant as this will enhance the offer in our high street.

The issue for planners is the Nando's home delivery hub and the % of takeaways that would require an application for a change of use to A5. The Council has policies around the granting of further A5s as we have one of the highest levels of A5 takeaways in the country and one of the highest levels of obesity. Restaurants do have an ancillary "de minimum" use - usually for customers who call in for a takeaway pizza as in Trattoria Raffaele but the substantive business is as a sit down restaurant.

Highways are also asking about the transport arrangements for the mopeds and Deliveroo bikes. There are no loading bays on Spring Hill as Sainsbury's agreed to use the loading bay outside the Pavilion on Kirkdale. The traders on the even side of Kirkdale agreed not to have a loading bay as they preferred short term parking for customers. For changes to parking and loading bays there is usually the need for consultation with the traders and residents in this case regarding the loss of parking on Spring Hill.

I understand that officers are waiting on further information from Nando's. I have had an onsite meeting with the developers and the Sydenham Society as this is part of a plan to redevelop the whole of the corner that was originally Cobbs Department store. I have had a conversation with the planning officer and expressed my support for the change of use to A3 and suggested a further meeting to understand the master plan for the site.

By the way I do not agree with your comment that the high street is a real mess and I can give you an update on the empty shops should you wish. I will continue to work with planners and developers to promote a vibrant high street that meets the needs of all our residents.

I hope that helps in explaining why this is not a straightforward change of use.

Kind regards

Chris

Cllr Chris Best

I am a town planner and frankly this does not wash with me.

The application is for a change of use to a large A3 restaurant not to A5 takeaway.

The suggestion that it will be a delivery hub is I feel misleading. This suggests that sydenham will become the focus for all nandos deliveries within the wider area.

There is no evidence within the information provided that a takeaway would be the primary use at all. It is a restaurant with a takeaway service which would be de minimus.

It seems clear to me that some people are trying to find any reason to refuse this application rather than to approve it and make it happen.

[ptmartin]

It might help if others in favour similarly emailed our councillors to express views that this be resolved. The progress is frankly glacial...

Sydenham Ward:


CllrChris.Best@lewisham.gov.uk

CllrLiam.Curran@lewisham.gov.uk

Cllr_Rachel.Onikosi@lewisham.gov.uk

[appletree]

Incredible that obesity is one of the issues being considered here. Is this n issue whenever food is sold? The chicken is not even fried at Nando's, unlike in the countless chicken shops.

Incredible it's about takeaways when, as I understand it, they were not even mentioned in the planning application.

Incredible that Cllr Best thinks the hig street and Kirkdale are not blighted with empty and low-quality shops.

I really start to think the council actively wants to stifle urban renewal in this area.

[Pally]

Hi Chris

An update on the empty shops would be helpful and interesting. Thanks

[sydres]

Sydenham monthly market = Fail
High Street banners = Fail
Sydenham as a vibrant high street = Fail

Who is linked to them all I wonder?

[lawrieparkman]

I have just emailed the concellors - this is getting ridiculous

[Pally]

Chris, Similarly to the recent thread in discussion with the Sydenham Society, this forum has the potential to be a positive means of communication from councillors and with councillors. I suspect that councillors ignore it a lot of the time because of perceived and actual negativity but that negativity comes from frustration and a lack of information. Countless times, people have searched the Lewisham website, found little information and then made comments on here, asking if anyone knows anything.
Chris, it would be very helpful to have that update on the empty shops. Also, can you tell me where people can get the information that you provided in your original reply, as presumably it is in the public domain somewhere.

Thanks

[prince]

Chris, Similarly to the recent thread in discussion with the Sydenham Society, this forum has the potential to be a positive means of communication from councillors and with councillors. I suspect that councillors ignore it a lot of the time because of perceived and actual negativity but that negativity comes from frustration and a lack of information. Countless times, people have searched the Lewisham website, found little information and then made comments on here, asking if anyone knows anything.
Chris, it would be very helpful to have that update on the empty shops. Also, can you tell me where people can get the information that you provided in your original reply, as presumably it is in the public domain somewhere.

Thanks

Hi. All information that forms part of the planning application should be publicly available and published on the Council's planning portal. There is no information about home deliveries on the planning portal. If it forms part of the application it should be there, especially if it is a factor that it is apparently so crucial in the determination of the planning application.

[Sydenham]

Part of the issue for planning committees is that sometimes applications say one thing but immediately they are granted and the business is up and running then the reality of what is actually delivered does not match what was proposed. WHat do you do then?

This also applies to housing developments. Pertinent to the Windmill application just passed (and the Greyhound)..

The developer is relying on the council not being able to impose any (or worthwhile) sanctions for breach of agreements.

I know of one local restaurant that was granted a restaurant license with allowance for a small amount of takeaway business. In fact it majors as a takeaway business with very few covers served in the restaurant area. Looking at it you would say it was a take-away.

Its human nature to stretch all constraints. Shame there is no effective council sanction - it takes too long and they only have resources for major transgressions and only after a lot of effort (look how long it took to bring the Greyhound developers to book).

[prince]

Part of the issue for planning committees is that sometimes applications say one thing but immediately they are granted and the business is up and running then the reality of what is actually delivered does not match what was proposed. WHat do you do then?

This also applies to housing developments. Pertinent to the Windmill application just passed (and the Greyhound)..

The developer is relying on the council not being able to impose any (or worthwhile) sanctions for breach of agreements.

I know of one local restaurant that was granted a restaurant license with allowance for a small amount of takeaway business. In fact it majors as a takeaway business with very few covers served in the restaurant area. Looking at it you would say it was a take-away.

Its human nature to stretch all constraints. Shame there is no effective council sanction - it takes too long and they only have resources for major transgressions and only after a lot of effort (look how long it took to bring the Greyhound developers to book).

The council can quite effectively use planning conditions or obligations within a section 106 agreement as methods of control. Whether they actually enforce these is another matter.

This application is for a large restaurant with probably a takeaway/delivery service as an ancillary use. This is quite different to basically someone wanting to operate a takeaway but applying for a restaurant use to get permission.

[Pally]

Hi. All information that forms part of the planning application should be publicly available and published on the Council's planning portal. There is no information about home deliveries on the planning portal. If it forms part of the application it should be there, especially if it is a factor that it is apparently so crucial in the determination of the planning application.

Prince ...that was what I noticed and why I asked! I wondered if Chris could tell us where we could find that information re home deliveries ...as I could not find it anywhere on the Lewisham website / lanning portal!

[Mayowthorpe]

Yet again, Chris Best goes missing when locals have serious questions.

Personally, I'm not surprised, but why on earth is she in her current role? What does she actually add to the area?

[Steveofsyd]

What a lot of waffle from The council. The people of Sydenham want this and not the unwelcome misguided opinions of a council that has messed up just about anything they have touched.
Look at Lewisham compared to Southwarh and Lambeth and they fall far behind in development expertise.

Shoddy and pathetic

[appletree]

In my previous area in north London there was a Nando's. I am not aware of it doing any takeaway trade. It is a sit-down, eat-in restaurant; you could take your food away, but there was no delivery. Why someone thinks this one will be different is unclear to me.

I wonder if someone has a financial interest in stopping this development.

[Ghlpc]

I have noticed deliveroo drivers coming into the pizza express in Beckenham, but not the nandos (at least while I've eaten there). I have never noticed a large group of bikes parked up waiting for deliveries on or around the area.

However I have seen this in other parts of London, where drivers congregate and find a safe and convenient spot to park and wait near a parade of shops. Is this what planning is worried about?

As for councillors responses on this site, they are pretty active on other local forums and seem to communicate and respond frequently. In fact on the East Dulwich Forum there is a dedicated thread started by a counciler encouraging questions on local issues, and responses seem quite frequent.

No reason why it can't work here, and as mentioned by pally could help alleviate speculation and probably a lot of negativity.

[Willy]

I'm a little confused as to why Deliveroo is even being mentioned? It's not part of Nandos and is a completely different company so any bikes parked up are nothing to do with Nandos anyway.

[stuart]

I'm a little confused as to why Deliveroo is even being mentioned? It's not part of Nandos and is a completely different company so any bikes parked up are nothing to do with Nandos anyway.

And the disturbance caused by customers who arrive by car or bike would have greater impact anyway. And they stay for hours, not minutes as in a Deliveroo collection. So how do we solve that problem - by keeping it a blackboarded horror at the centre of our town?

While I personally hate Nando's - only a goldplated offer by Waitrose or Richer Sounds would have me even thinking of delaying or disrupting this application. I fear (like the objections to the wonderful Tattoo parlour opposite) personal prejudices are over ruling what would be a great benefit for other people in our community.

Dear Councillors & SydSoc - please take note of the sentiment here and get something done.

Stuart

[leenewham]

Planning needs to evolve as it's not suited for today's high streets, especially as many businesses are hybrids. I'm working with a cafe/dog groomers, record shop/cafe/events space, charity shop/church and community meeting space. Categorise that!

Nando's is essentially an A3 restaurant. Deliveroo can go to any restaurant that sign up for the scheme. It's really not an issue, they offer customers more choice and they take up little room. A few Deliveroo bikes taking food to peoples homes is different to people taking to food away themselves. Lots of them do it in surrounding areas: https://deliveroo.co.uk/restaurants/london/sydenham

Clearly, Nando's is primarily a sit-down enterprise. I don't recall the planning application saying anything about take-away.
If businesses aren't operating as they are supposed to, then the issue is with planning enforcement.

A question for Chris: When she says 'we have one of the highest levels of A5 takeaways in the country', does she mean Sydenham or the borough of Lewisham? Planning should apply to high streets, not boroughs in general, surely?

If obesity is an issue, then stopping people from taking the same food home they can eat in a restaurant isn't really helping. Tackling levels of sugar, how people cook etc would have a greater impact.

Here a are a few items from Nandos menu:
Quinoa Salad 338cal
Supergrains salad 443cal
Mediterranean Salad 285cal
Chicken Butterfly 330cal
Grilled chicken burger 337cal

Clearly, this hasn't really been thought through. I agree that there is a potential issue with deliveries, but that applies to any business wanting deliveries, and as delivery vehicles get bigger, it will apply more and more. The issue isn't stopping businesses from opening, it's about finding a solution.

Can we please let common sense should prevail? Otherwise Sydenham will continue to stagnate due to the council, despite many fantastic local businesses doing their best. Planning is woeful in many councils and the whole system needs reviewing, especially in regard to high streets, as do rates etc.

[Rachael]

A quick Google search shows that Nandos has trailled a new home delivery service that has been rolled out nationwide with the last week. So that IS something that needs to be taken into consideration with the planning. I support a Nandos at that site, by the way, but I thought it only fair to mention that Chris Best is not entirely talking out of her hat by raising the takeaway issue.