All posts in the topic Not another coffee shop? (Short link)
Summary
- There are 25 posts — by 13 authors — in this topic.
- Latest post made by Julia Gasper at Jul 09 11:56 UTC
From: http://www.headington.org.uk/news/today.htm Oxonian Travel at 63 London Road moved to Wantage on 7 November 2007 and is being refitted as a branch of Subway. Can someone tell me how SUBWAY have managed to take over the old Oxonian Travel shop? As far as I can see there is no planning application for change of use on the Council website. They got away with this in St Clements too - how do they do it? I have just walked round the Headington shops and have counted, without the pubs,ELEVEN places where you can get coffee. EIGHT of them are on the north side of London Road.
Subway will be joining the following six Headington retail shops which have not sought planning permission to operate as A3 cafés: • Café Bonjour • La Croissanterie • Copacabana Café (formerly La Plaza) • Mojo's Café • Squash Fresh Food and Juice Bar • Starbucks Presumably they all maintain that they are A1 retail shops, but while they all undoubtedly are part retail (as some sandwiches and coffee is taken for consumption off the premises), I think most people would agree that they also have a sizeable (if not overwhelming) café element. All six have tables and chairs out on the pavement as well as inside. Three of the business actually have the word "Café" in their name, which is surely a naïve admission of majority A3 usage? Starbucks is much more circumspect: you won't find the dangerous word "café" anywhere, and when you search for a branch on its website, you are presented with a list of their "retail shops". Similarly, Subway only has "stores". The big boys are clever, and have clever lawyers. The Use Classes Order needs tightening up to establish what constitutes a café, because at present any local authority which tried to force a business like Starbucks or Subway to apply for joint A1/A3 use would be eaten for breakfast and washed down with an espresso. The Brighton & Hove Issues forum has a thread on a situation where Starbucks was refused planning permission by a brave local council because it was not an A1 shop, but it opened anyway: http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/bh/messages/topic/7J6BwoYLLYh5PygTiOv5fQ The other cafés in Headington all have A3 planning permission, or (in the case of Queen's) joint A1/A3/A4 usage. As for the Café Online, it is a special case: internet cafés were exceptionally classified as A1 retail in the 2005 amendment to the Uses Classes Order 1972.
Interestingly, Subway describes itself thusly: Q: What is the SUBWAY(R) chain's mission statement? A: To provide the tools and knowledge to allow entrepreneurs to compete successfully in the Quick Service Restaurant industry worldwide, by consistently offering value to consumers through providing great tasting food that is good for them and made the way they like it. Sounds pretty much like an A3 "restaurants and café" to me! Mind you, probably better than being unoccupied, boarded up or yet another charity shop. Look on the bright side - an overabundance of coffee vendors should lead to lower prices - or at least, a fun new sweepstake of 'guess which one goes to the wall first'. On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 1:30 PM, Stephanie Jenkins <<email obscured>> wrote: > Subway will be joining the following six Headington retail shops which have not sought planning permission to operate as A3 cafés: > > • Café Bonjour > • La Croissanterie > • Copacabana Café (formerly La Plaza) > • Mojo's Café > • Squash Fresh Food and Juice Bar > • Starbucks > > Presumably they all maintain that they are A1 retail shops, but while they all undoubtedly are part retail (as some sandwiches and coffee is taken for consumption off the premises), I think most people would agree that they also have a sizeable (if not overwhelming) café element. All six have tables and chairs out on the pavement as well as inside. > > Three of the business actually have the word "Café" in their name, which is surely a naïve admission of majority A3 usage? Starbucks is much more circumspect: you won't find the dangerous word "café" anywhere, and when you search for a branch on its website, you are presented with a list of their "retail shops". Similarly, Subway only has "stores". The big boys are clever, and have clever lawyers. > > The Use Classes Order needs tightening up to establish what constitutes a café, because at present any local authority which tried to force a business like Starbucks or Subway to apply for joint A1/A3 use would be eaten for breakfast and washed down with an espresso. The Brighton & Hove Issues forum has a thread on a situation where Starbucks was refused planning permission by a brave local council because it was not an A1 shop, but it opened anyway: > http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/bh/messages/topic/7J6BwoYLLYh5PygTiOv5fQ > > The other cafés in Headington all have A3 planning permission, or (in the case of Queen's) joint A1/A3/A4 usage. As for the Café Online, it is a special case: internet cafés were exceptionally classified as A1 retail in the 2005 amendment to the Uses Classes Order 1972. > > > Stephanie Jenkins > Headington, Oxford > Info about Stephanie Jenkins: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/stephaniejenkins > > This topic's messages may be viewed at: http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/6J8i6i7hpXNkPC5jfuBbkv
I prefer to go to Jericho for coffee, a snack or a meal. I am not tempted by
any such outlets in Headington.
When The Chequers in the Quarry was refurbished I had great hopes of walking
down the alley to eat in a congenial atmosphere. I thought it might be like
The Anchor on Kingston Road - a pub with excellent food, no amplified music or
intrusive football screen, with customers from all age groups.
I'd be glad to know of anywhere within walking distance of the Quarry where I
can meet with a friend or group of retired colleagues to eat something
interesting and have a chat. Can anyone recommend such a venue?
Marie Vickers
The Black Boy.
The planned new Subway store is not the first branch of this American chain to open, there is a branch at Oxford Brookes. see http://www.oxfordprospect.co.uk/HEADINGTONNEWS.htm
I would feel surprised and almost disappointed now if a new café did not open
in central Headington at least every other month.
Can we get into the Guiness Book of Records?
I feel the same way as Marie about the Chequers. We walked in once after it had
been done up and then walked straight out again!
Actually there's one in St Clements and one in Cowley Road at least.
The one at Morals Bar I am told is due to end its lease this summer
(finally! it was a better eaterie when the students ran a kitchen
doing breakfasts, lasagna and so on).
With the opening of Subway, the central Headington District shopping centre now
has 22 separate eating establishments, and one wonders if saturation point has
yet been reached.
In case you think I have counted some twice, here they all are:
12 cafés (most of which also offer takeaway food): Café Bonjour, Café Noir,
Café On-Line, Copacabana Café, La Croissanterie Café, Mojo’s Café, Posh Fish,
Queen’s, Squash Café, Starbucks, Subway, and Yummy
4 restaurants (all of which I think also offer takeaway food): Bar Meze, Dong
Dong, Hang Chow, and Mirabai
3 takeaways (no food consumed on premises): Domino’s Pizza, Oxford Kebab House,
and Shanghai House
2 pubs serving food: Britannia and Royal Standard
1 hairdresser serving food: Fusion
The supermarkets also sell sandwiches, and there are other eating places such
as the Black Boy and Butcher's Arms just a short distance away from the London
Road, so no one in Headington need starve -- provided that they can afford to
eat out or buy takeaways.
We are fast losing our retail shops, seven of which are now largely operating
as cafés; and our little Sainsbury's is believed to be closing on 6 October,
which will be particularly hard on the elderly people living in the complexes
to the west of the garage.
I have just heard a rumour that Costa Coffee is hoping to move into John Leon House (the new shop on the corner of Holyoake Road). This sounds plausible: we need them to complete our coffee set. If this turns out to be correct, it will create an interesting situation, because Connell’s Estate Agent has just launched an appeal against the City Council’s refusal to allow them to move across the London Road into John Leon House and to swap the A1 (retail) and A2 (office) usage of the two buildings: http://uniformpublicaccess.oxford.gov.uk/publicaccess/tdc/ApApplication/application_detailview.aspx?keyval=K2NO9CMF0IR00 Planners considered that Connell's proposed move "would not represent an acceptable like for like exchange”. But what is the point of the City Council meticulously enforcing the Local Plan in this way but to allow the Headington District shopping centre to be taken over by new cafés (all of which now claim to be A1 retail shops)? It would appear that if you seek a legal change of status you are turned down, but if you do what you like you get away with it. (I think it’s best if coffee shops are kept separate from the Royal Mail, please – they are a big topic that will run and run.)
There was an interesting item on Starbucks, lack of planning permissions, and
A1 retail designation, on You & Yours today, at about 12.45 (pm). You should
be able to get it on the BBC's Listen Again. Quickest way to get there is to
Goggle You and Yours Listen Again, and then choose Friday of this week.
Yes, they've got themselves into trouble in Brighton too, only there
they did apply for planning as I understand it and got it refused and
still opened anyway. People are making a big fuss and standing up to
them there.
Speaking of "coffee shops", don't you think it interesting that there
are so many shops now trying to sell us our favourite drugs -
caffeine and sugar. Maybe if we had some real "coffee shops"
imported from the Low Country they might be better received...:)
Have you ever seen a caffeine addict unable to get their fix? I
have, I yell at them every morning when I get into the office...:)
Thank you so much Pippa for drawing our attention to that "You and Yours programme" on the retail/café debate; and also thanks to Liz who emailed me off-forum about it. It is well worth hearing. It revealed that in Pinner planners just would not accept Starbucks's claim to be an A1 retail shop, and so forced them to apply for retrospective A3 planning permission. Harrow Council then refused this permission, because Pinner has a similar local plan to that of the Headington District shopping centre. Needless to say Starbucks have gone to appeal about the Pinner decision. But fact that they were forced to put in an application is surely a triumph -- an admission that they are _not_ a retail shop? If Starbucks lose their appeal, I hope that Oxford City Council will be brave enough make the seven (probably soon to be eight) cafés operating in Headington A1 retail shops to apply for retrospective A3 planning permission (not to mention the numerous ones in other parts of Oxford). You can find the "You and Yours" item Pippa's way, or go to: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/youandyours/ Under the "Listen Again" section (about half way down on the right) click on "Friday". The item is at 43.30minutes, so it's best to use the arrows at the top left to jump by 15 minutes twice and then by 3 minutes so as not to waste time waiting for it. The item starts with a piece about the Starbucks that opened in Brighton after being refused A3 planning permission. But although the "You and Yours" item happened to focus on Starbucks, the principle of course applies to all cafés that claim to be A1 retail shops.
P.S. I have just discovered a much easier way of locating the "You and Yours" programme on "retail" coffee shops: Go to http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/youandyours/listenagain/friday.shtml and click on the Starbucks item. (Make sure your volume is turned on -- guess whose wasn't.) (I hope I will be excused this third message today: I reckon it shouldn't be necessary to wait 24 hours to make a correction to a message because of the "two messages a day" rule. If anyone disagrees please send me a private message.)
Whats wrong with Coffee shops? If you don't like them,don't use them.They seem
very popular with the majority of people.It's better than having Headington
just full of charity shops and estate agents!
It’s not that there is anything wrong with coffee shops; but I don’t think we
need 12+ of anything selling an almost identical product in such a small
shopping centre, where so many everyday retail goods are now unobtainable.
There is no danger of our getting more that the present nine estate agents,
because the city council is very strict about not allowing A2 (office) usage in
A1 (retail) shops. Thus the number of offices of any description always remains
constant and is irrelevant to the coffee shop/retail argument.
But charity shops are definitely retail, and the present six are enough. The
important question is what can the city council do to attract small retailers
into Headington?
I walked by what was Smarts Fish & Chip shop recently and it appeared unused.
Does anyone know what is going to be?
Planning permission has been granted for the Smarts Fish & Chips shop to be demolished and replaced by a four-storey building comprising a Class A3 (café) unit on the ground floor, and three flats over the first, second, and third floors. The City Council planning website at http://uniformpublicaccess.oxford.gov.uk/publicaccess/tdc/tdc_home.aspx seems to be down at the moment, but when it comes back you can see the plans under the reference: 07/01883/FUL Welcome to the forum, DG.
So the City Council has given permission to replace the fish'n'chip shop with a
thirteenth café ( or fourteenth if we count the impending Costa café)
shoulder-to-shoulder with all the others along the London Road?
This is getting bizarre. Central Headington is turning into a café suburb.
I will certainly go to the website when it recuperates and put in my feeble
little protest against this endless replication. Who else is going to do that?
In reply to somebody's question, yes, I believe the City Council could do
something by refusing permission unless the business is going to offer one of
the things that we residents so plainly lack - a bicycle shop, a greengrocer, a
jeweller/watch retailer, a shoe shop, a garden centre etc etc. But there is no
sign of the City Council behaving in a rational or considerate way. I am not
going to complain about the charity shops as at least they benefit their
charities.
And what about the litter angle? Selling drinks in paper or plastic cups
anywhere but perhaps on a train should be illegal. As it is, every time I walk
through Quarry I pick up litter in the form of cups and boxes from MacDonalds,
thrown away in the streets and alleys.
You can't complain about a planning application after it has been decided, and
the Smarts Fish & Chip shop decision was made last November.
I couldn't see anything to complain about with that application, except
possibly the height of the building. It simply exchanging A5 (takeaway) use to
A3 (restaurant/café). I would rather see a smarter restaurant than a greasy
dilapidated takeaway. (No retail shop was lost in the process, so it did not
contravene the Local Plan.) And if you are worried about plastic cups and
litter, this should be an improvement.
We need some restaurants and cafés. The current excess in the centre of
Headington is caused by seven (soon to be eight) businesses which most people
would recognize as A3 cafés using A1 retail shops without seeking a change of
use.
Oxford City Council has a long history of getting its fingers burned
and yours and my taxes swallowed up by appeals. The first and
foremost presumption of the planning process is that a property owner
should be able to do what they choose with their own property - right
or wrong it is pretty much a fundamental definition of property!
Compelling reasons must be found to deny them that right. And there
would be no change of use permission required for Smarts anyway (see
later *).
It seems to me that at least one of nearly everything you list as
being needed in central Headington has in fact closed in recent years
with owners either unable to sell their businesses as going concerns
or being offered more for the property alone without the business
which is also a sign that that particular business type is less in
demand than other types.
So far as I can gather it is only class A4, drinking establishments,
which can be the subject of a "saturation" policy such as has
happened in George Street and other parts of the city centre over
drinking establishments and there wouldn't be an equivalent for
cafes, so it would not be as "simple" as declaring a caffeine
overload zone and then be able to oppose any change of use to class
A3 based on that policy.
As has already been noted, transfers within class A1, which is the
ruse many of these coffee shops are using to try and dodge even
asking for permission, cannot be prevented in any way unless it needs
planning consent for some other reason, such as exterior works in the
conservation area. (*) Indeed it is a measure of the special
protection shops already have in the use class system that almost
anything can become class A1 without permission but something already
A1 needs permission to become another class - in the case of Smarts
A5 can become A3 without requiring change of use.
So it's hardly the City Council's fault that they won't break the
law! What the City Council achieves in the Covered Market (albeit
precariously at times) it does so because they are the land owner and
condition occupancy by diverse sectors through the leasehold
arrangements not merely relying on planning. Whether there ought to
be more planning control or not is another matter; what you all think
might be an obviously good thing might result in planning blight as
you try to micromanage what can trade where. Besides, I thought UKIP
were in favour of considerably loosening planning regulations?
So who here has connections with the various land owners of the
retail spaces in central Headington? That's where to start in my
opinion.
I often think Headington is dead after 7 o'clock at night and needs more cafes
and restaurants.I have lived in other parts of the UK and think Headington
doesn't have that many restaurants to other places I have lived.I look forward
to Smarts fish and chips changing to a cafe and wish the newsagents in Windmill
road would of been allowed to become a cafe or take away as it looks terrible
boarded up as it is now,lets face it nobody else has taken it on! What happened
to the bakery shop in Windmill road becoming a restaurant?
As for George street,I don't believe the hype that it has too many pubs! last
time I walked down there people were queuing to get in places so there cannot
be too many or else there wouldn't be any need to que!In fact there did seem
too many of the same type of food i.e. pizza and pasta places than there are
pubs!
It’s an interesting point about Queen’s Bakery. It was granted planning permission in June 2006 for change of use from joint retail (A1) and restaurant/cafe (A3) uses to retail (A1), restaurant/cafe (A3) and bar (A4) uses. It was going to reopen as the Kami Restaurant, but over two years have passed and nothing has happened. Does anyone know what is going on? The planning application was 06/00907/FUL and you can see the details here: http://uniformpublicaccess.oxford.gov.uk/publicaccess/tdc/DcApplication/application_detailview.aspx?caseno=IYSE4SMFWC000 I like to see some cheerful restaurants open in the evening too, but the pseudo-cafés in A1 shops tend only to open during the day and are a waste of space for anyone hoping to use the Headington District Shopping Centre for its primary purpose of retail shopping.
I agree with Jock Coats - Who actually should define what is too many? Surely
there must be a lot of people in Headington who actually use these coffee shops
or there wouldn't be so many. On the other hand if they are not needed or used,
they will actually make a loss and go bust/elsewhere. The thing that scares me
is that someone who, say, spends £1.50 on a cup of coffee twice each working
day, is spending about £700 on coffee in a year!
Jock Coats writes that he thought UKIP was in favour of "considerably loosening
planning restrictions".
NOPE.
UKIP has never been in favour of removing the local council's role in deciding
whether we have thirteen cafés next-door to each other ( a power which Jock
tells me that the local council does not, anyway, have).
The UKIP website states clearly that our policy is one of "Independence for
local planning
i.e. - no more overriding by remote appeal bodies."
If this principle had been followed, then the unwelcome and insinsitive
development on Shotover Mound a year agold have been stopped. It cut right into
what was supposed to be green belt in a conservation area.The plan was rejected
by the local council, the resident/s association and a court of law. Then all
of them were overruled by John Prescott, who is himself a puppet of the EU
(which is telling us to build two million new houses to accommodate mass
migration). UKIP is more democratic.
We have an old fashioned view that ministers are there to carry out what the
voters want, not to overrule it.