NEW OPENINGS, NEW CLOSINGS

[Eagle]

Unfortunately one persons human rights can be anothers misery. For example one persons right to loud music can ruin someone else's life.

[Robin Orton]

Does anyone else think that the council should translate planning and other policy speak into understandable English? The above paragraph is utterly ridiculous.

I absolutely agree, Lee. Whoever wrote it has ignored the need for punctuation to be clear and consistent, and for sensible paragraphing. They also seem a victim of the all-too-prevalent bureaucratic addiction to Initial Capitalization on Every Possible Occasion.

I offer - and I waive my fee - the following as stage 1 of a possible redraft. I can't guarantee its accuracy, as in the original it is in many cases unclear as to which bit of text goes with which 'policy':

The shop front and roller shutter including associated housing are not acceptable
as they have a detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the
property, the street scene and the conservation area, which is contrary to the following policies:
• URB 3 (urban design);
• URB 6 (extensions and alterations);
• URB 8 (shop fronts);
• URB 10 (roller grilles and shutters);
• URB 16 (new development, changes of use and alterations to buildings in conservation areas) in the unitary development plan adopted in July 2004;
• objective 10 (protect and enhance Lewisham’s character);
• spatial policy 3 (district hubs);
• policy 15 (high quality design for Lewisham), in the core strategy adopted in June 2011.
• policies 7.4 (local character) and 7.6 (architecture) of the London Plan 2011.

[Tim Lund]

Unfortunately one persons human rights can be anothers misery. For example one persons right to loud music can ruin someone else's life.

Maybe Eagle, but read it carefully, and you will see that in this case it also appears necessary - for the proper execution of Lewisham's enforcement obligations - to draw people's attention to the fact that a 'person' may not actually be a 'natural' person, but also merely a 'legal' person. I'm not sure that this comes under the rubric of the Human Rights Act, so presumably there are some Equal Opportunities implications. At which point, I have to admit I'm lost. Perhaps Chris Best can clarify.

[leenewham]

Eh?

[Tim Lund]

Lewisham Council have a report to the Planning Committee on the enforcement action

...

and policy 7.4 ‘Local Character’ and 7.6 ‘Architecture’ of the London Plan 2011.

Does anyone else think that the council should translate planning and other policy speak into understandable English? The above paragraph is utterly ridiculous.

I was going to comment on this more or less seriously.

It looks to me as if what is really going on is that enforcement has not done what it should, according to the full majesty of Lewisham planning rules, and that Chris, SydSoc and the local Amenities panel are making an issue of it. It is possible that this will achieve something in this case, but only at the cost of diverting officers' time from other parts of their casework. For things to get better, we simply need a more efficient Council. That could be done by some combination of:

• reallocating staff to enforcement;
• simplifying the rules to be enforced;
• explaining the rules better; and
• better management of the enforcement process

I doubt if Lewisham is capable of this. Clearly there are some efforts to improve matters, and Lewisham's guidance on shop fronts - available on the web site here is a good stab at explaining the rules better. Attempts to involve the local community in managing the enforcement process are also sensible, such as the Locality Fund grant of £1,000 to produce a leaflet on the Conservation Area in 2009/10 - although I'm not sure that anything came of this.

However, reallocating staff in the current climate is not going to happen - the best we can hope for is that enforcement is protected from cuts, but I don't think this is the case. The complexity of the rule book, which Chris quotes with such relish, must also be part of the problem - it must make being an enforcement officer require much more training than necessary.

I think this is the nub of the issue - we can't stop ourselves making over complex regulations. It's far from being just a Lewisham problem - the illustration of the tendency which comes to mind is the expansion of the standard guide to UK Tax from 4,998 pages in 1997 to 14,586 in 2011.

"The cuts" - against which various of our local Councillors were marching yesterday - mean that local government is in effect giving up on various of its obligations - and here we see one example.

OK - I'll stop here. You've read where this is going before on other threads,

LB Lewisham is not a natural unit, in the way that London is ... we've ended up with a local political class whose existence is tied up with a political structure whose relevance is steadily decreasing - witness the recent transfer of running leisure services to the charity Fusion.

and probably will again

[Tim Lund]

Can't say this one is making me want to rush in and spend my money ...

[Eagle]

Is it Ann Summers?

[G-Man]

I agree Rod. It's basically more or less a pop up. I spoke to the woman running it and she told me she allegedly has cheap rent for a while. Until it's let pernamently. Good luck to her I say.

G-man

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[amtiaz]

hi everyone! Agree good luck to lady thats how j sainsburys started. I wanted to ask if any one knows what happened to the drink store on kirkdale opposite la fitness? Its been closed a while now

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[leenewham]

J. Sainsbury's started like this at 170 Dury Lane, Holborn:


BIG BIG difference.

Even a pop up needs a sign. Or a window display. Or some form of attracting custom. It looks worse than the empty flooring shop.

There are lots of local designers and artists nearby, how about we help her out? How about the Sydenham Society gets behind something like this?

[Tim Lund]

Can't say this one is making me want to rush in and spend my money ...

It has a ramshackle, anti-corporate charm.

I wish here I could find an early photo of the Blue Mountain Café in North Cross Road, because that really did have 'a ramshackle, anti-corporate charm' and was a big part of its success. A friend lived round the corner, and his rather boho crowd of musicians, journalists and artists just loved the scraps of newspapers on the walls. This is the best I can find to illustrate the point



I admit it's possible I'm missing something with this new opening - visual design is not my thing - and I do hope the business does succeed, but my reaction supports a point Lee so often makes, which is the importance of appearance. Of course, I still feel that content matters more, and if anyone tells me they offer good bargains or services - not of the Ann Summer kind - I will look in.

[leenewham]

Content is more important. But unless you can get someone to experience it, it's worthless.

Content and presentation go hand in hand. Both are worthless without each other. It's a fairly simple concept.

If you go for a job interview, you dress the part. You have have the best CV in the world, but if you turn up looking like a tramp, you probably wont get the interview…

It's got nothing to do with being corporate whatsoever.

[Tim Lund]

Lee - I agree it's got nothing to do with being corporate, but it does have to do with how many chances you get. The point about a job interview is that you get just one chance, so appearance is at its most important. OTOH, if a new shopkeeper has enough in the bank to pay the bill for say the first three months, then they have as many chances as times possible customers pass by. Obviously if the first impression is awful, there's less chance of anyone going in, but someone may still go in on the off-chance and come back with accounts of what amazing bargains there are - hopefully telling others via this Forum. I'm imaging a mathematical model right now to capture the trade-off between investing in a good window display, and focusing on the product line and social marketing, but, to be serious, I can't imagine that a half decent shop display will always pay for itself.

[Edit - apologies for possible double negative confusion - I should have written "I can't imagine that a half decent shop display won't always pay for itself". To be clear, I think shops should always pay for half decent signs - as a minimum.

Sorry, Lee ]

[leenewham]

Shabby shops turn away custom, not just from their own store, but the whole street. Fact.

I'm not sure why you are arguing against making shops more attractive Tim. There is no mathematical formula, it's difficult to quantify as you don't get access to actual figures. All I can say is that one shop we designed in North London (a beauty salon went from not turning over enough money to be registering for VAT to having a full order book), Amo from Billings sent us a lovely message over Christmas saying that the identity for his shop made a real difference to his business, feedback from shop owners has been really positive for all the improvements we have seen across London as part of the OLF.

We should be encouraging small shops to up their game Tim, not finding excuses for them to neglect how they look and make Sydenham look shabby.

[leenewham]

I think you are are confusing the shabby chic with rundown and shabby Rod.

I agree with you about the convenience store across the road.

Perhaps I explain what i'm getting at better here:
http://designedbygoodpeople.wordpress.c ... ppearance/

[Tim Lund]

Shabby shops turn away custom, not just from their own store, but the whole street. Fact.

I'm not sure why you are arguing against making shops more attractive Tim. There is no mathematical formula, it's difficult to quantify as you don't get access to actual figures. All I can say is that one shop we designed in North London (a beauty salon went from not turning over enough money to be registering for VAT to having a full order book), Amo from Billings sent us a lovely message over Christmas saying that the identity for his shop made a real difference to his business, feedback from shop owners has been really positive for all the improvements we have seen across London as part of the OLF.

We should be encouraging small shops to up their game Tim, not finding excuses for them to neglect how they look and make Sydenham look shabby.

Lee - please read what I write - I'm agreeing with you, and I am not making excuses.

[Edit - earlier I wrote 'will' when I should have written 'won't' which could well have confused anyone ]

There is a difference in stress, but our basic views are not far apart, even if we get to them from different approaches - that should reinforce your conclusions. The reason I write as I do is not to oppose you, but to suggest you might lose good local traders who do know something about running a business, just not what you know from your particular expertise. I think I'm being more open minded than you, so ultimately more inclusive (of good businesses). The test case is the Penge Food Centre, whose display is nothing like as good as your work at Billings, but as a shop is probably ahead of most of my family's other favourite local places - Billings, Fresh & Fruity, Kirkdale Bookshop, Sydenham DIY, The Cake Store, White's Pet Centre (thanks to new kitten ), Kenté, Sugahill, Wellbeing (apologies to any I've forgotten ...).

I think Penge Food Centre has massive potential, and I would love to get you helping them as much as you've helped Billings. For more of my thoughts about them, see this earlier post - "Support your local Turkish Supermarket"

[G-Man]

On another note. Anyone noticed the Chinese Restaurant, Golden City (?) is having a makeover?

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[Tim Lund]

The sign above the shop could do with a new design but isn't the shop temporary, or am I wrong? I suppose this is one of the problems with the Pop Up idea.

I think if you're doing a pop up shop, where you don't have so long to win customers over by good products and service, it probably matters more to make a good first impression.

[leenewham]

Rod, why do you think they have to spend a lot of money?

The Jill Sign was £140 for the lettering.

The Billing sign was £450.

For a pop up shop they could have stencilled their sign which would have cost less than £100 to buy the stencils and they do it themselves (there is a place called cutlasercut in Vauxhall that does this).

Or perhaps a friendly local artist might want to work with them as I suggested in another thread as was the case with the pop up in Forest Hill. Look at that pop up butchers, it looks amazing and has done incredibly well.

Think of it this way.

You could spent £150 on some fliers, spend a day delivering them yourself to keep costs down and reach 5000 people. Return on such advertising is about 1-2%. Most get thrown in the bin without even being seen.

How many people on foot and in cars look pass Sydenham Road and Kirkdale in a day? The best and most visible advertising is your shop front, your sign. If you match you sign to any other branding it's even more effective. It doesn't have to be corporate, I'm anti corporate anyway.

And it doesn't have to be expensive.

How your shop looks isn't a cost. It's an investment.

[Tim Lund]

Lee - having asked you to read what I wrote earlier, e.g.

to be serious, I can't imagine that a half decent shop display will always pay for itself.

I realise that I'd have done better to write "I can't imagine that a half decent shop display won't always pay for itself." - which I can see was confusing Anyway, it's what I meant, so, really, we are saying the same thing, even if with different stresses.

Thanks also for the costing for those signs, although calling them 'investments' rather than costs is just a bit or rhetoric; various sorts of collectors - stamps, art, fine wines - tell themselves they are making 'investments', when they are actually just speculating. What matters is the sort of arithmetic you explain, of how much a shop keeper gets back, in increased gross margins, for every £1 they spend on a decent sign. If you take it a bit further, and estimate how many people will pass the shop, break it down into pedestrians, car drivers, bus passengers, and then estimate the odds that they will respond to the sign, then the arithmetic will start to look a bit more like higher mathematics, but it's really all the same - just being as commercially realistic as possible.