"A" Boards blocking the pavements

[monica]

Cella, I shall pass your concerns on to the shop keepers of Lordship lane. Please remember we all have a right to our opinions' and we share them freely with each other as a solid community of shopkeepers, who want to provide the continual customer care we provide.

I look forward to sharing my colleagues response on here. Good luck on your nonsensical quest Cella.

[monica]

Cella, like everyone else on here I have every right to post without having to reveal who I am. All you need to know is I am part of the retail community, who has been dealing with the likes of you for many years. You are so self absorbed in your own little plight, you fail to look at the bigger picture.

We are a community of Shop keepers who contribute to this community, by doing so we allow ourselves the privilege in putting street furniture on our land, to brighten up the lane and East Dulwich in general.

I am not sure what your end game is, however you sir or madam are wrong.

[cella]

Well you are entitled to your opinion Monica and I won't retaliate by calling you what you've called me several times now. I am guessing that you won't be interested in helping your customers in making life easier for some of them. It's probably right that you won't reveal which of the businesses is yours as you certainly don't sound very welcoming. C'est la vie.

[JoeLeg]

cella Wrote:

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

> My original concerns remain - the pavements are

> too narrow for the amount of people, cyclists,

> joggers, buggies, cars etc using them.

Possibly the weirdest statement I?ve read on here. The pavements are too narrow for the amount of people who use them? This is London. Space is limited, very limited. It?s the same all over London. You want space? Move somewhere else. When I was a kid we didn?t have these problems around here, then loads more people moved into the area and it got a lot more vibrant and less crack-heady. That?s the price we all pay for living in a place like this, it was never designed for this many people and there?s frankly very little anyone can do that won?t require nanny-state legislation.

Added to

> the users is the range of random street furniture,

> chained cycles, signs, etc all taking up space.

> And yes some A Boards too.

So why are you singling out business owners? Is it because you think they?re an easy target? You?ve just listed a myriad of obstacles that are, bluntly, part and parcel of daily life ins busy metropolis. We share this city with many others.

The concerns on here

> for shopkeepers and business owners legitimate

> outside space is connected to this but has

> dramatically overridden the original post

Well that?s because you started going on about it; don?t start what you can?t finish.

> However, though personally I'm a firm supporter

> and frequent user of many of the local businesses

> in LL in particular, due consideration has to be

> given by Southwark to the needs of pedestrians.

Ah ha! Right, so you recognise it?s Southwark that makes the laws and not bunisses? Maybe you?ll redirect your efforts to the council then?

> How they do this will be challenging and some

> people have wrongly interpreted this as an attack

> on local businesses and their space.

Read your own posts and you?ll see it looks very much like you telling other people what they can do on their own private land.

Nobody has

> suggested that they should give up any land at all

> as far as I can see.

No, you?ve just said that they should prioritise pedestrians. But that bit of paving *isn?t a public highway* (no matter how often you ignore this point, it isn?t going away), so you?re wrong.

Really though, things have to

> improve for pedestrians and shops have a vested

> interest in their customers being able to reach

> them easily and safely.

You really think things are that bad down on Lordship Lane that this merits some kind of lobbying campaign? You must have a lot of spare time...Seeing as you do, could you tell me how many people have been injured in the last, say, 12 months by A Boards, chained bicycles, buggies, people jogging and cars parked partly on pavements?

I've been sent a couple of

> suggestions for routes through to Southwark so

> will pursue after elections.

Again I ask, do you really think the public highways down there are so treacherous, so mis-managed, that it requires this? Thousands of us use them every day and with a little consideration for others we all seem to rub along fine. There?s plenty we can be berating Southwark Council for, I?m frankly astonished someone thinks this is a reasonable complaint.

[cella]

Cant agree with your interpretation of comments and concerns on here JoeLeg so I guess we will leave it there for now.

[JoeLeg]

Cella, your whole position from the start has been based on what you personally believe, and you?ve not once directly countered any points other than those made by Monica, so I?m hardly surprised by your refusal to back up your position with anything past ?I?m right and you?re all wrong? levels of argument.

You?ve got this utopian view of how the local area should be, and now I don?t feel bad in saying that you?re being unreasonable in your assessment of the impact on local pedestrians. This kind of attitude is divisive and unnecessary.

[monica]

Cella, I have shared your comments, with my retail colleagues, they came on here, looked at your comments and laughed.

Do you know why they laughed, because 99% who have commented on here do not agree with you. You are on your own little Island, waving in at us from the outside. Like I said, good luck with your quest, I am sure all your Friend are backing your cause. :)

Take care I am waving bye bye

[ianr]

I've pm'd Siduhe to thank him/her for the post with the photographic evidence, and to suggest that the photo labelled surma.jpg would be better renamed memsaab.jpg. I'm too fearful to get involved in the thread further atm.

[JoeLeg]

But it?s clear on some of those photos the A boards concerned ARE placed on the public highway, which is a different matter to that espoused by cella, who seems to believe that *all* A boards be so proscribed.

If businesses are doing that then it?s a matter for Southwark to intervene; that?s not the bone of contention here and never has been. Though I still maintain this is hardly a matter of grave concern, and I?d genuinely be interested to see evidence of the public being overly obstructed by this signage.

[cella]

I can't agree with your personal interpretation JoeLeg so can't see any purpose in going round in circles. Monica, you however, demonstrate a scary approach. I'm now quite glad I don't know your speciality as your attitude is unnecessarily hostile towards potential customers.

[flocker spotter]

as an aside, i have just come back from LL. lots of A boards outside the shops section of their pavement (assuming they have one ). Most of these business are long established and have been here for sometimes decades. They are also, strangely enough, the first to attempt to marshall support when an issue that may impact their profitability arises.

[JoeLeg]

If the A Boards are not on their own property then that?s a different matter, as I?ve conceded repeated times.

My issue is with shops being told what to do on their own private land, as well as a wider disagreement that I have with the idea that Lordship Lane is somehow one long trip hazard. The pavements at crowded, but I?ve yet to see evidence that pedestrian are at risk.

Cella - I don?t object to you disagreeing with me, it?s your refusal to engage in actual debate on the issue that I think undermines your standpoint.

[cella]

JL - that's clearly your opinion but I'm afraid I disagree and also disagree with your interpretation of comments. I can't just agree with you to stop the postings.

[JoeLeg]

That ?wooshing? sound you can hear is the point flying waaay over your head...

[cella]

Well, the impression you're giving is that you've taken up a position on this (fine to have an opinion) but you just keep repeating things either I haven't said or reinforcing your interpretation of comments made here so there doesn't seem to be any point continuing really.

[monica]

Cella I am happy you think I am scary, there is no way I would ever entertain the possibility of having your patronage in my store. You would put off both customers and staff, with that look of sour lemons on your face.

You clearly think its your way or no way, typical of a politician really. You must be a politician :)

[JoeLeg]

Aaaand whooooosh again cella...!

[cella]

Monica - I definitely won't be engaging with you further as I do think you seem quite scary and angry. I really can't imagine you have the support you think amongst your peers as I would guess most of them care both about their image and welcoming potential customers. If you think that I'm a politician then your attitude and manner towards elected people is contemptible. JoeLeg - you normally appear assertive but reasonable in postings. However you seem to have wedged yourself against the wall on this thread and you're not moving. I've no clue what your last posts even mean so I think I'll draw a line now on this. Expect you'll have to have the last word though...!

[PSJ]

The mutant offspring of A-Boards has appeared outside the Co-op - a giant coffee cup! :D