Shepards in Dulwich Village to become a Sainsbury's?

[Zebedee Tring]

Then don't use self scans. I refuse to do so on the basis that I am not being given a discount on my purchase because I am doing the job that the store staff should be doing.

[binkylilyput]

Zebedee Tring Wrote:

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

> Then don't use self scans. I refuse to do so on

> the basis that I am not being given a discount on

> my purchase because I am doing the job that the

> store staff should be doing.

Thanks for the advice, it might not have occurred to me not to use them otherwise......I find that kind of advanced level problem solving difficult to do for myself ;-)

[Zebedee Tring]

There's no need to be sarcastic, binkylilyput (what kind of name is that, for gawd's sake?). The trouble is that too few people take a similar attitude, in contrast to people in other countries such as the USA who expect a bit of service from the shops that they use.

[herne hilly]

Saying that the I was in the US in the summer and they had self service kiosks at the pharmacy and grocery store. So times are changing everywhere. Its sad to see independents being pushed out by the giants, but who would open a convenience store especially with high rents, rates and having to open from 8am till 11pm.

[dimples]

What a shame !

[kibris]

yeah happy days someone got a good payout, i cant wait to see Dulwich Village with orange lights

[Asset]

I've spoken to the guys in the shop and they said they expect to be employed by Sainsbury's - which is a good thing at least. Some of them have worked in there for many years and I like them.

I agree it's a shame - Shepherds is expensive but for basics like bread and milk not much more so than other small grocers and as someone else has pointed out it does have an eclectic range.

I doubt the newsagents will survive but that's not really a problem 'cos it's pretty crap and not an independent so who cares other than for job losses.

The village - for all its haters - is a great space to live near to and IMO Sainsbury's is totally wrong for its vibe.

Not much we can do about it tho I suspect

[binkylilyput]

Zebedee Tring Wrote:

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

> There's no need to be sarcastic, binkylilyput

> (what kind of name is that, for gawd's sake?). The

> trouble is that too few people take a similar

> attitude, in contrast to people in other countries

> such as the USA who expect a bit of service from

> the shops that they use.

Um, it's my name. Problem?

[Zebedee Tring]

It's certainly an unusual name, I'll give you that. Unlike, say, Bill Jones or Nora Smith.

However, among the problems that I may have, your name sadly is not among them.

[binkylilyput]

Ah ok, Zebedee Tring. Yeah, I guess you may have some problems

Anyways, back to Sainburys in Dulwich maybe?

[NormalForNorfolk]

It will be the single most useful thing to have happened in the village for a long time. Enough artisan this and quirky that. We have an overpriced tile shop, an overpriced wine shop, seventeen places to buy croissant in the morning (overpriced, natch) and no pub. Yes, it's dull but groceries are a pretty dull part of life. As for Shepherds - I don't need a tube of chestnut puree all that often and, when I do, I'm prepared to travel. Their poor staff work with decrepit fridges that pump out heat and all they have is a gazillion fans to circulate the hot air. The stuff in them is often out of date or downright mouldy and the electricity bills must be huge! It's not an independent, it's part of Londis and, according to the staff, "head office" couldn't care less. Independents stopped being able to afford the rents in Dulwich Village a long time ago. As long as Sainsbury's employ them and keep their shop front something less than neon, I, for one, welcome our new Sainsbury's overlords.

[@Woodwarde]

Take a look at the attached. Won't this fit in beautifully.

After all:

What distinguishes Dulwich from its environs is the preservation of the character of the area - the appearance of individual properties is in harmony with that of neighbouring buildings, maintaining the integrity of streetscapes

Not my words - extract from the Dulwich Estate?s entry on the Charity Commission website............

[NormalForNorfolk]

Well that's a custom more honoured in the breach than the observance. Have you seen the hideous new developments at the village end of court lane or the plans for the Audi garage? The Scheme of Management aside, the objectives of the Dulwich Estate are to maximise income for its beneficiaries i.e. the foundation schools, chapel and almshouses. It cannot (and does not) compromise that for the benefit or convenience of residents. In other words, it doesn't have to give a stuff about the locals. The frontage of the proposed Sainsbury's is no more or less offensive than the ridiculously generic (and largely empty) Caf? Rouge or ten-a-penny Pizza Express. I spoke to the staff again this evening and they seem more than happy about it. Shepherd's is literally a waste of space and, given that it should remain a grocery store and no smaller company could afford it, the Estate has, for once, approved something which is of some use to the people who actually live here.

[@Woodwarde]

Sainsburys seem to be able to be flexible about making the shop facade sympathetic with a local environment.

Beyond that they seem to push past other concerns by claiming the greater good for local shoppers and business.

http://www.j-sainsbury.co.uk/about-us/property/convenience/case-studies/

A bottle of 'Taste the Difference' will be in ready and cheap supply for all who use this route. Will the age limit be 18 or 25? What good news for the local schools and locals....

[NormalForNorfolk]

Will no one think of the children?! Honestly, you seriously think that having a Sainsbury's will mean drunk school children rampaging round the streets of leafy Dulwich in their uniforms? C'mon. The young people round here seem to have better things to do and I'm still hopeful (triumph over experience though that is) that we will one day have a pub again and the kids can go back to doing their under age drinking in there in the time honoured tradition. Sainsbury's has a Think 25 policy which means that, although you can legally buy alcohol at 18, they won't sell it to you unless you can prove it or you look over 25. Shepherds, as far as I know, has no such policy, is also open late and sells booze but it's proper dodgy and ridiculously overpriced. Alternatively, there's the pretensions of Dulwich Vintners which is merely overpriced. As a grown-up, I'll be more than happy to nip out for a reasonably priced bottle of red of a gloomy Wednesday evening.

I'm beginning to suspect that the people who object to this have alternatives in the "just popping out", walking distance shop but would prefer Dulwich Village to keep Shepherds so they can nip in once a year and gush over how quaint and eclectic it is.

Anyhow, delightful though this badinage is, it's a done deal. The estate has done what it always does and maximised its profits. We are getting a Sainsbury's local, opening in January. Hurrah!

[DulvilleRes]

NormalForNorfolk Wrote:

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

> Well that's a custom more honoured in the breach

> than the observance. Have you seen the hideous new

> developments at the village end of court lane or

> the plans for the Audi garage? The Scheme of

> Management aside, the objectives of the Dulwich

> Estate are to maximise income for its

> beneficiaries i.e. the foundation schools, chapel

> and almshouses. It cannot (and does not)

> compromise that for the benefit or convenience of

> residents. In other words, it doesn't have to give

> a stuff about the locals. The frontage of the

> proposed Sainsbury's is no more or less offensive

> than the ridiculously generic (and largely empty)

> Caf? Rouge or ten-a-penny Pizza Express. I spoke

> to the staff again this evening and they seem more

> than happy about it. Shepherd's is literally a

> waste of space and, given that it should remain a

> grocery store and no smaller company could afford

> it, the Estate has, for once, approved something

> which is of some use to the people who actually

> live here.

The line that the Dulwich Estate peddle is that they have 'no choice' in their decisions when it comes to maximising their income. They patronisingly referred to it in their latest PR accompanying their Scheme of Management invoice demands. Whatever the 'hue and cry'( their quote) of local residents ( err.... a 600 strong petition opposed to their activities around the SG Smith development and a demonstration), their hands were tied in their actions to put profit above everything.However, talking to charity professionals, this simply isn't true. The Charity Commission allow a certain amount of leeway to take in other, wider factors into consideration as to how a charity conducts it's business.

Irrespective of this, there is a fundamental contradiction at the heart of their brief - on the one hand taking cash off us to preserve the area, and telling us we can't put a dish up or touch a tree without their consent (for which there will be a fee), and on the other having licence to wreck the area with dubious development schemes. They are both gamekeeper and poacher at the same time - nice work, if you can get it. I think they are fundamentally discredited as an organisation that should have any kind of pretext of authority to conserve Dulwich, as is the Dulwich Society, with whom they have close links. The Estate should have no input into local affairs, and should be seen for what they are - a money making machine subsidising predominately the local private schools, for whom local residents don't have any more status than serfs.

On a more fundamental level, the Estate's charity model doesn't stand up to close scrutiny. The original will which Edward Alleyn left to educate '12 poor scholars' and educate poor local children got subverted by an Act of Parliament in less enlightened times to translate into subsidising the big local private schools - their input into state schools in minimal. I think it is time that Act of Parliament was revisited.

[NormalForNorfolk]

Quite. I often think E Alleyn must be turning in his grave.

[NormalForNorfolk]

http://www.dulwichsociety.com/journal-archive/72-summer-2011/646-chairmans-comment196 Off topic but this is amusing on the madness of the Dulwich Estate and why we now have the Crossing to Nowhere at the roundabout. It's worth noting that the "land" in question is a triangular bit of grass barely big enough to graze a couple of sheep on.

[kibris]

I bet if it was a M&S no would be making a fuss about the matter

[@Woodwarde]

NormalForNorfolk Wrote:

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

......... various above

Yes, correct. East Dulwich has a variety of options, as has H Hill and I'm not on the doorstep of the Village, so I am not worried about direct impact. But I do value Dulwich Village as a unique place and one that attracts people to live and visit. And these changes can happen in the blink of an eye if locals don't have a view and rely on the Dulwich Est.

The majority of kids are not spending their money at the Dog now (well for sure as its closed) - unless coming from the well funded pockets of those fortunate enough to live locally. No, they and most under age drinkers will use the cheaper supermarkets and stock up for a night out. The odd top up at the Dog is neither here nor there and the kids that indulge locally at present have not been an issue as far as I am aware. Access to cheaper alcohol will be attractive to a wider range of kids, local or otherwise. But hey, it's not the main point nor the only one about the change of licence.

As you will see from the link of case studies that I posted, Sainsburys are used to interacting with the community when they set up new stores and there are a fairly consistent set of issues raised - particularly about impacts on the streetscape and community.

Maybe miracles will happen and the extent of Sainsburys branding and its lorry deliveries won't matter a jot. The convenience of the shop will override any downsides. But I don't think I am prepared to leave it to chance while there is time to comment. And I don't live on the doorstep.

[Tessmo]

Well said @Woodwarde. I don't live on the doorstep either, but I do care about what the middle of Dulwich Village looks like, because I don't want the whole of London to look exactly the same. AND I care about how and when deliveries will be made AND I don't want the new store open 24/7.

Since the S. G. Smith planning application was pushed through despite very vocal opposition to ever more huge and expensive houses (which the area does NOT need), I don't have any faith in the Dulwich Estate caring about anything other than maximising profits for its beneficiaries i.e. the already well-off independent schools. (It SHOULD care about the impact on the local community of its decisions, but it doesn't, and it's probably time we all got together and forced it to.) So I think it's up to us all, regardless of what the Dulwich Estate thinks, to say to Sainsbury's what we want and don't want in the middle of Dulwich Village. Which is worth looking after, for everyone's sake,

[NormalForNorfolk]

http://www.dulwichsociety.com/news/1229-sainsburys It won't be. It will be open one half an hour earlier in the morning and one hour later in the evening than Shepherd's. Shepherd's also has deliveries - supplies of American cup cake frosting don't get dropped by fairies. The shop will be the same size as at present and serve the same purpose. Deliveries will pale into insignificance compared with the traffic about to be inflicted on us by S.G. Smith development which, for the record, I opposed very vocally because I don't trust the Dulwich Estate further than I can spit. I care very much about the community I live in but thriving communities also need decent services and infrastructure - they don't thrive by being preserved in aspic. I too will examine the planning application carefully when it arrives but think this one will turn out to be a non-issue. Also, for the record. I was joking about under-age drinking in the Dog but didn't think I'd need to spell that out.

[minder]

It's funny how things change.

I just remember walking home from Kingsdale with my sisters and friends through the village to get to the sweet shop just past where Shepards is now. There were two ladies serving. The queue went out of the doorway. Don't know what Shepards was then and the old sweet shop is long gone somewhere along the row of shops there.

[minder]

Probably the sweet shop was where the barbers shop is now.

[ken78]

soon be a 99p shop coming to the village times are changing !!!