The Future of the "KFH Premises"

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by pamish on October 18, 2012 at 11:44

Let's ask Nick Walkley for his ideas. If he's worth £190,000 pa he must be really really clever and connected, yes?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by ant on October 18, 2012 at 11:50

The Piccadilly Line must run right underneath...new Harringay Tube Station?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by pamish on October 18, 2012 at 12:54

This discussion has relevance to the Grainger plan for Wards Corner. If the only way to pull in high rents is to let to bookies, Grainger's development will go bust, as they have pledged, for their S106 contribution (the rest of the S106 commitment seems to have leaked away) not to let any of their shops to bookies, moneylenders or fast food outlets. So we look forward to lots of new boarded-up shops in our Town Centre, just like in the run of new shops opposite the college 100yards up the High Rd.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by matt on October 18, 2012 at 14:50

Independents (as opposed to chains) now account for 67% of all High Street units, (though this is probably higher along Grand Parade/Green Lanes).

A report out today (highlighted here for example) updates the dire retail situation. It mentions 'some shops, however, are bucking the trend. There were;

• 11% more payday loan outlets in Britain in the first six months of 2012 on a net basis and
• 11% more bureaux de change,
• 8% more pawnbrokers 
• 7% more discount stores
• 5% more convenience food stores
• 1% of charity shops. 

Bill Grimsey, former chief executive of Wickes, Iceland and Focus, and who has just published Sold Out, a book on the future of the high street, said: ''communities need an approach that finds alternative uses for these (empty) buildings. Much-needed affordable housing would be a good place to start."

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by 1kqjo2ic1ek7i on October 18, 2012 at 15:31

This chap has transformed empty spaces... perhaps we should involve him? 

http://spacemakers.org.uk/people/dougald/

have a look at the space makers website - his brixton village project is quite interesting...

http://spacemakers.org.uk/projects/brixton/

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Justin Guest on October 25, 2012 at 20:14

Hugh. I just received this from the Ladder Community Saftey Partnership team:

Proposed Betting Shop, The Coliseum, corner of Green Lanes/St Ann’s Rd

Dear All,

Since the last LCSP update, events have moved so quickly that we’ve been waiting for an appropriate moment in order to take stock of the situation.

This is how things currently stand:

 the freehold is owned by Paul Simon Commercial (now separate from the estate agent on GL), but is on a long lease to the estate agents  Kinleigh Folkard Hayward (KFH)

• KFH agreed to a very high rent of £70K p.a. but never opened it as their local office, and have been trying to offload the lease ever since.
• as the premises only has A1/A2 planning use (ie retail or financial services/estate agent/betting shop) there was always a real danger that a betting shop would in the current climate be the only sort of outlet which could generate enough profit to pay the very high rent/rates
• in effect that is what was about to happen: KFH were in the process of signing over the remaining 10 years of their lease to a betting shop (Tipico)
• the LCSP worked very hard with other key stakeholders (local Councillors & MP /  GL Strategy Group/Traders/Coliseum residents) to try to persuade KFH to wait a little longer. This is because we all believe that the improvements/regeneration of GL next year, via the Mayor’s Outer London Fund money, should attract another leaseholder which would not be a betting shop
• a dramatic eleventh-hour temporary reprieve occurred last week, triggered by a direct phone call from MP David Lammy to KFH’s Managing Director, followed up by a massive emailing of KFH by large numbers of individual residents, all of whom voiced their concern
• KFH (and Paul Simon) are now re-marketing the site/lease which gives us more time to try to find a solution which does not involve another betting shop - for this stay of execution we are obviously very grateful to KFH
• the LCSP continues working very closely with the Coliseum Residents Group (co-ordinated by Paul Stork) the GLSG and David Lammy and together we are developing some innovative ideas and proposals for the future use of the site
• in December we’re hoping that the site can be used for a ‘pop-up’ shop with the dual purpose of displaying the GL regeneration proposals and acting as a focus for community Christmas activities
• however the threat of a betting shop still remains unless an alternative use can be found and agreed. It’s therefore very important that, as residents, we maintain the pressure on KFH over the next couple of months
• so, if you haven’t already contacted them, there’s still enough time to do so. You can express your views directly to KFH via email or post at KFH House, 5 Compton Rd, Wimbledon, London SW19 7QA

 Best wishes

Ian

Now, not much we do not already know here, but what struck me was the bits above I highlighted. Before that I should say I felt slightly depressed when you made this post Hugh because it is absolutely the right question, but there was a sense that after having all made such a fuss there we all were looking at our feet shuffling in the dirt when positive proposals were called for. The reality is the rent KFH are asking is likely to be high as they will not want to sit on a wopping loss.

So, with that in mind what struck me was perhaps there are two parts to this puzzle:

1. KFH are stuck with a crappy commercial deal that they are trying to cover by sub-letting
2. Paul Simon (Commercial) are sat pretty taking the proceeds from said crappy deal.....

So, we should not only consider what pressure to bring to bear on KFH but also Paul Simon (Commercial)-PSC- surely. If PSC were to renegotiate their deal with KFH. If they did this, and took some of the pain (via a reduced income on the lease) then KFH would be able to market at a rental level that someone other than a Bookies could actually sustain...

Let me throw out that some pressure may wish to be brought to bear on PSC, as well as focussing predominantly on KFH...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John McMullan on October 25, 2012 at 22:29

Tomatoes is a bit "Straw Man" don't you think? Justin is right. Of the three "players" in this deal, the community, KFH and Paul Simon, one of them is rubbing their hands gleefully at the others' discomfort. Why shouldn't Paul Simon become involved in a solution for this? Why should they just be allowed to sit there and collect their winnings? It is perfectly OK to renegotiate a lease, or at least attempt it.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Justin Guest on October 26, 2012 at 8:23

Stan. It’s funny how quickly postings on HoL can be perceived as being inflammatory, certainly when what was meant to be a positive suggestion as to how to solve this issue is seen to be described as dictatorial, ludicrous and flat wrong.

I have thought long and hard about how to respond to your comments. Let me start by trying to characterise the problem without any of my own bias. Let me stick to the facts, and correct me if I am wrong:

1. KFH have agreed a rent lease from Paul Simon (Commercial)- PCS- that they now find is a commercial drag as they are not going to use the space for its initial intended purpose.
2. The value of the lease is perceived to be ‘high’, and in trying to reduce their exposure to this lease KFH are trying to sublet to a third party.
3. The planning (taking from Pamish below) only allows for “A1/A2 planning use”- commercial use only I believe.
4. As a result of the value of the lease and the restricted planning use there is a perception that there are limited options as to who may viably take this sublet.

Now, I am trying to do a couple of things here.

(1) Characterise all aspects of the issue at hand as John rightly does below. I want to highlight that one key component to this problem is PCS. A component that has so far has been somewhat overlooked in the discussion.

(2) Make the suggestion that PSC may well be part of any solution, and ‘bring pressure to bear’ could be something as simple as getting PSC and KHF in a room together to discuss the sustainability of this lease. I am not sure this is suggesting any less pressure than was brought to bear successfully on KFH recently.

I should also add to this on reflection that perhaps the council is also part of the solution if the planning use is also to be considered one of the moving parts- though the residents may rightly have issues with any potential change…

If you have ever had any experience of operating in a commercial environment where there are more than two parties involved you will know that in reaching a deal all the moving parts to that deal are ultimately a part of the solution. So, I think it perfectly legitimate to consider PSC as part of the problem and the solution. Heck, we have just seen several European nations renegotiate their international obligations, this sort of process happens all the time. Businesses restructure their obligations as a matter of course. Feel free to tell my therefore why my suggestion is misguided. It worked for Greece and Ireland

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by pamish on October 25, 2012 at 22:14

the premises only has A1/A2 planning use

How fixed is this? Who decided - PSC? The Council? Somewhere it said they - PSC - don't want A3 (restaurant) use, why would that be?  What's A4 use?  If the potential uses could be opened out that would help, surely? Can't see the licensing dept turning down a way of stopping another bookies.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by JeremyS on October 26, 2012 at 10:19

I was just laughing at this local group, lpsc. They've obviously chosen to write harringayonline out of their version of the story and I was wondering about what little local intrigues are behind all that. I used to be involved with my local resident group in weymouth and the petty little politics are hard to believe. I was just amused to see that it's just the same in sophisticated londontown. Keep the soap opera coming harringayonline - hysterical!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Hugh on October 26, 2012 at 8:38

Your points 1 and 2 are bang on Justin.  Getting the right combination of people to work together to find a solution is now key. 

The first stage in all this was getting KFH to remove the Sword of Damocles. That's been achieved. David Lammy’s role was important in that. And, despite any attempts at recasting history and airbrushing out the role of local people, as Mr Lammy said, the massed voices of the people of Harringay as expressed on Harringay Online and by email were the determining factor in changing the course of events. To move things forward, I think it’s now critical that local people continue to be involved. 

I believe the future should be shaped by a coalition between local people alongside the Council, the GLA, Paul Simon, KFH, David Lammy and local businesses. I refuse to believe that there's not a solution to be found that delivers wins all round. 

In an email after KFH announced the end of discussions with Tipco, David Lammy wrote the following:

We now need to harness the strength of the community and the council to make the case for use of that site. If people are interested in feeding into this process, please email me your details: mail@davidlammy.co.uk. I plan on putting together a roundtable of interested people so that we can make the best case possible. 

I welcomed this statement when I first read it and published the email address for people to contact Mr Lammy. 

Our local MP is in a position to bring together all the necessary parties to work together to ensure the solution is flushed out. He's perhaps in the best position to broker finding a solution, keeping petty local politics out and ensuring that local people beyond the local interest groups are given the opportunity to be actively involved. So, I am very much looking forward to the roundtable as a constructive way forward and the one most likely to find the best solution.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Justin Guest on October 26, 2012 at 8:45

I think that is right Hugh. David Lammy's role as a facilitator who can bring all relevent parties together is possibly critical to actually stepping forward.

So, question. Is there someone here communicating this to David? He is not someone I have regular contact with, but soem HoLers may... He may even be on HoL and following this.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page