Backshot!

Saturday 9th February

One of the modules I studied for my first degree was 'Retail Development'. Alongside the study of theoretical retail concepts were comprehensive case studies regards urban decay, urban renewal, urban villages and out-of-town centres, all of which provided a wide grounding in understanding the commercial dynamics of cities towns & villages. I've never had the opportunity to put any of those principles I learned into professional or commercial practice, but the studies have subsequently proven to be a useful grounding in the world of local government, where increasingly local authorities have responsibility for commercial town planning and in some cases have even become partners in retail schemes across the boroughs all over the country.

I feel very confident therefore in discussing the news that is the proposed Notcutts & Waitrose scheme in Bagshot and the reasons why I'm fully in support of it.
Frankly, its superb news. And here's why.

National 'chain' retailers base a lot of their location theory on demographics, threshold populations, footfall and proximity to other similar stores, including their own. For example, a bookseller such as 'WHSmith' requires a threshold population of about 35,000* people from the 'store hinterland', a subsequent percentage of regular shoppers from that threshold and a similar percentage of a particular demographic before they will locate a shop premises in a town. A full sized chain chemist such as Boots require about 50,000 people; department stores have a higher threshold while jewellers require far fewer shoppers, which is why there isn't a House of Fraser on Frimley High Street.
In turn, big store retailers act as 'anchors', around which a variety of local chains and independent shops agglomerate. This is how you'll find a Holland & Barrett and a Superdrug near a Boots for example, and more recently a Next springing up at The Meadows. Around the big anchor stores, the addition of smaller retailers creates a commercial synergy that benefits all; similar stores complement each other - Superdrug will benefit from shoppers who go to Boots, and vice-versa - while smaller speciality shops benefit from the extra footfall derived from the larger retailers - boutiques & House of Fraser, and vice versa.

During the 1980's this theory was researched, then distilled and a version of it was rolled out into the 'out of town' retail park concept which led to the creation of a great number of out of town shopping centres across the country. These parks provided convenience for the consumers with ready made beneficial agglomeration for the retailers. What the planners didn't quite appreciate at that time was the crushing effect these retail parks had upon the town centres. While the retailers were delighted, the High Streets began to suffer. This in turn led to a massive push in the 1990's back into the urban renewal for the town centres and you will have noted how local town centres such as Woking, Walton-Upon-Thames, Farnborough and our own Camberley reversed the trend in the years since with new town centre shopping redevelopments to draw custom back into the High Streets. In a majority of cases, these developments were funded by profits derived from the inclusion of lots of private apartments in these schemes, explaining why all of the above schemes appeared hand-in-hand with large residential developments.
Not to everyone's taste of course, but the princple has proven to be sound. And notwithstanding global downturns, the efficacy of the idea is proven locally by the fact that SHBC are currently planning another such partnership scheme for their owned frontage along the A30.

Lamentably, in a see-saw type effect, the great success of such schemes have led to a decline of the smaller village commercial centres. When a consumer goes to an 'all-singing, all dancing' town centre to eat, go to the cinema, or shop in a particular national chain, they don't tend to shop at the local village unless its for a specific speciality item, or for convenience.
It is this last point that the planners and the businesses have wrestled with and are still in the process of addressing.
Furthemore, this effect is not solely limited to regenerated town centres. In recent years and on a local, smaller scale, Lightwater has become a vibrant local commercial centre, at the expense of both the other local villages of Windlesham and Bagshot (documented several times elsewhere on this blog). This is due primarily to the location of the only village bank, the central petrol station and Budgens, all of which have proven to be the 'anchors' around which the rest of the village retailers depend for custom.

A Waitrose store will change all of this. Waitrose will be the anchor store that Bagshot dearly requires.
Waitrose too requires a significant threshold population, demographic and footfall to locate a store, together with a solution to what it sees as a gap in their store network. They have decided that Bagshot as a location fits suitably into that network and will complement the existing stores at Sunningdale, Bracknell and Frimley which are deemed to be over capacity in terms of customer demand. They have discovered that customers are coming past Bagshot, through Bagshot and from Bagshot in order to shop at Waitrose. They have determined that a lot of these customers would be better served by another Waitrose store.
And this is the key for Bagshot.
The proposed store is what a Waitrose architect described to me this morning as a mid-sized store. Rather than becoming a 'metro' sized shop, they have elected to go mid-sized at 21000 sq ft.
This is not a 'Tesco Local'. This is not M&S at BP. This proposed scheme is larger than the Waitrose store at Sunningdale.
Threshold population for a Waitrose of this size is somewhere in the region of 80,000 people drawn from the 'store hinterland' and as described above, the shop is sustained by a footfall as a proportion of that. This means that there will be a potential 20,000 of these residents specifically & regularly coming to Bagshot to shop.

If only one thousand of those customers regularly shop in Bagshot, the village will be transformed.

Subject-to-planning of course, Bagshot is back!
It is the best news that Bagshot has had in years.

For the sake of the village, support it.




*Data 1997

'Il Duce'

Wednesday 30th January


I've worn my head shaved for several years now.

I recall advice from a 'dome-headed' school master (Mr Feaver - and yes; we often asked him whether it was catching..) who told us during 'A'-level Geography that
'once you can see the rear of your head while looking front on into a mirror, it's time to bring out the Bic'.
I took his advice in my early thirties, coincidentally just ahead of my political odyssey.

And given some of the hairstyles I've donned over the years I think it was probably good advice, although I have spent the last few years reassuring both political colleagues & opponents alike that while I might bear a passing resemblance to 'Il Duce', I don't in fact share a similar political outlook.
In fact, my politics remain as they have always been. I veer to the right on some things and towards the left on others; I have friends and colleagues of all demographic, ethnic, political and lifestyle groups. I am in fact, pretty much where you'd imagine a modern Conservative to be.

Seemingly though, recent events tend to be suggesting that the term 'modern Conservative' is something of an oxymoron. I watched the recent Newsnight programme with a sense of confusion matched only by some of the opinion expressed within the article. And then, last night I was made aware of a podcast interview along similar lines, which struck me further dumb the more I listened.

Like much of the 'gay legislation' of recent years, including Clause 28 and Civil Partnerships, Gay marriage does indeed appear to be a particularly contentious issue. I personally - and probably very fundamentally - consider the subject to be a theological rather than a political one: it is surely a subject for the theologians to debate and amend as appropriate, as has been done with the sacrament of marriage for years (remarrying divorcees anyone?). And the social debate regards partnerships, families, adoption et al, has passed. We've already debated and legislated for those rights. But notwithstanding the existing position and the probability of ultimate guidance from Europe, it is clear that even debate on the subject is causing all sorts of political problems. Nowhere more so than here in Surrey Heath, where both of the above interviews reveal a haemorrhaging of local Conservative Party support to other right of centre parties, ostensibly down to the subject of Gay marriage.

Whether such a claimed loss of support is down to this subject remains a matter of some conjecture. I happen to believe that any such dwindling is down to a range of unpopular coalition moves in general rather than any single issue. What is clear though is that the timing of the Prime Minister's recent European referendum declaration is no coincidence: if anything was going to stem the tide to other parties, then greater certainty about the future of the UK in Europe was probably going to do it.
The gay marriage debate will continue of course and the Prime Minister is wedded to moving it forward apace. The great pity is that the debate is already showing hitherto bright and considerate people to be seemingly less so.

At best, some of them appear to be desperately confused.
At worst, well;
make your own minds up.



.

Good Advice from 'Papa'.

Friday 18th January


"Use short sentences. Use short first paragraphs. Use vigorous English. Be positive, not negative."
Ernest 'Papa' Hemingway


I imagine Ernest Hemingway would be horrified by this blog. I tend to write as I speak but given that people are often asking me to repeat what I say, it is perhaps not the best way to write. What I do try to do though is stay positive. More importantly, what I also attempt is to pull a positive result from a negative circumstances.
Well, we all do, don't we?

Those interested in my reckless and deeply regrettable behaviour of last summer might be interested to know that I've successfully completed the DVLA 'Alcohol Awareness Courses'. These courses are offered by the DVLA to drivers in lieu of longer driving licence suspensions and in my case has had the result of reducing my suspension from twelve months - the minimum that a magistrate can impose - to nine. But while that is a positive outcome for me, that's not the reason for blogging about it.

No, more importantly this procedure has been in place for a decade or so and has been has proven to be a great success in preventing repeat offences. This was one of the points made at the start of the courses and 25 hours later, I could clearly see why. And while that first cold & wet Saturday morning outside the Salvation Army hall in Ashford presented in my mind all of the expectation that that image suggests, it wasn't anything like I'd anticipated. Frank discussions, practical science and a range of anecdotal evidence from both the course instructors and participants completely reassessed my point of view when it comes to having a pint and then getting in the car. Moreover, some of the revelations about the longer term effects of alcohol & metabolic rates came as a complete shock, particularly regards getting in the car the morning after a few drinks the night before; things that I suspect we all think that we already know, but given the 100,000 convicted drivers each year in the UK, clearly don't.

In fact, all of the people I have spoken to about elements of the courses have expressed similar surprise, both at the content and the fact that such simple and yet unknown facts are not part of the driving licence test. The conclusion among my peers is that rather than simply running periodic advertising campaigns, The DoT ought to make this sort of course a mandatory one for new drivers too in order to fully & comprehensively educate about the effects of alcohol before a licence is issued.

I fully agree.
And with that in mind I've written to our MP, Michael Gove in order to explain this whole process to him and to lobby for such a measure.

I'll leave the last word on this to Ernest Hemingway:

"I like to listen. I have learned a great deal from listening carefully.
Most people never listen".




.

Patience is a Virtue

Tuesday 29th January

At last.

When I was elected to the Borough Council in 2007, it came as something of a culture shock. For years I had been a director of various small companies where a decision made in the morning could be put in place shortly after lunch. And while I had previously worked for larger companies, they were all within the private sector where it seemed the profit motive also rightly urged fast decisions and fast action.
At Surrey Heath Borough Council, this was patently not the case. Similarly at County Hall too when I was elected in 2009. Pretty quickly I had to change my expectations in terms of the massive inertia that stifles ideas and decision making in Local Government. It's a massive slog to get things done, even with the support of a fairly disparate set of colleagues.
And then, just as I'd come to terms with that, public money became very, very tight.

If you have taken the time to follow this blog from its inception in 2008, you'll know that David Ivison & I put the case to the SCC cabinet for a speed limit reduction on Red Road way back in 2009 after they had 'called in' our decision to change the limit to 40mph. You may also know how I lobbied the county council from before 2005; an effort which I like to think resulted in the existing warning signs. In 2009, a forthcoming change in policy was quoted for the procrastination, alongside considerable - nay, exhorbitant - costs and the fact that Surrey Police didn't in fact support the limit change. But we continued to press for money and action with the result that the limit was agreed to be decreased to 50mph through the Surrey Heath Local Area Committee late in 2011.

So, to the present.
The more eagle-eyed motorists among you may have noticed the signs to indicate the speed limit reduction are now being erected along the length of Red Road. Shortly to follow are the terminal signs and the new flashing sign on the Westward approach to the MacDonald Road junction. Once these works are completed, the limit will be in force and therefore enforceable.

Given the length of time its taken to achieve this, I'm fairly protective of the new limit. However, I do very much appreciate that it is only the continuation of measures that will reduce accidents in this notorious blackspot. What I would like to have seen on my watch is a 40mph limit through the dangerous bends, coupled with a pair of traffic islands (roundabouts to you & I), but it is a lamentable fact of Local Government inertia, lack of money and the fact that SHBC appear to be squandering the opportunity to raise funds through the Deepcut development, that 4 years of work have resulted in a mere drop of 10mph.

(Still, even that is better than County Councillor Denis Fuller's fate in respect of the A30 Bus Lane, where inter-council emnity has stalled his efforts to remove the heinous - and dangerous - bus lane. But best talk to Denis about that subject)

There will always be this inertia in Local Government, but I can't help thinking ultimately that Unitary Councils will streamline this process. These are what the residents need.



The work continues.


.

Lightwater Congestion

Friday 21st December

For as long as I can remember, I've always picked up a cold in December. I can recall snivelling through Winter examinations at school when most of us used to carry around a toilet roll in our schoolbags to contend with the issue; and latterly, attending Christmas parties in a manner that would make the late Amy Winehouse blush, dosed up to the nines on a cocktail of Max Strength offerings from the various pharmaceutical companies.
This year is no different of course and with my 40th birthday rapidly approaching, I found this year's lurgy to be no less virulent than the one that kept me out of a grudge rugby match against KCS Wimbledon in 1987, with a mixture of razor blades in my throat and considerable nasal congestion.

Congestion apppears to be one of the subjects on everybody's mind at the moment and in this case, I'm referring to the spectre of the three main housing projects planned for this area in the forthcoming year.
Runnymede Borough Council's recent announcement that they intend to waive Green Belt status for the former DERA works in Longcross set the hares running. This announcement was on top of the long running Deepcut Barracks development saga here in Surrey Heath; and the confirmation that Cala Homes are pushing forward with the Brookwood Farm development in Woking, just south of Bisley. Conservative estimates at this stage suggest that these schemes will add somewhere in the region of 4000 new houses to this part of the world.

We do need more houses. We still build far too few new homes in this country to keep up with demand which is a lamentable position we have been in since the 1950's. There's a direct correlation with this under-supply, the introduction of the Town & Country Planning Act 1947 and subsequent revisions, and boom & bust property cycles, a subject I researched for my first degree dissertation back in the '90's and I'm generally in favour of measures that meet that chronic under-supply. But it has to be hand in hand with measures to accommodate the massive effect on existing infrasructure. I'm no 'NIMBY' (a development phrase that refers to people who accept appropriate development, but 'Not In My Back-Yard', as opposed to BANANA's, which refers to many prospective Councillors' election 'tickets' - Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anyone), but the combination of these three developments is going to have a devastating effect on the accessibility of this area. 4000 homes means up to 16,000 additional traffic movements PER DAY and it would appear that we are currently blindly marching towards a network gridlock in this area that would make negotiating the peak-hour South Circular seem like a Sunday afternoon cruise.

Lets be absolutely clear about this. This will only mean more traffic. And more traffic means more congestion on a network that is already at capacity, as evidenced by the recent Highways Agency announcement to make the Surrey Heath part of the M3 a managed motorway. If one extrapolates the accident numbers forward with the increased number of traffic movements, it can also only mean that we shall be looking at the probability of more traffic accidents. It is therefore absolutely clear that the road infrastructure will have to be considerably improved to sustain these additions and I am sad to say that I am losing faith in the ability of some of our local councils to assist in that delivery.

Seemingly, for example, up to 85% of the developer infrastructure payments for the Deepcut barracks are to ensure that there is a suitable SANGS (a Suitable Area of Natural Green Space). This is almost scandalous; but in this brave new world in which we are living it is deemed more important that we don't disturb a natural habitat on our mountain bikes than it is to ensure that we drop accident rates on some of Surrey's most dangerous roads.

So what can we do?
There is only so much any of us can do individually. Together though, we can put pressure on the decision makers to ensure that the appropriate steps are taken.
Write to me, Write to your councillors. Write to the leaders of the councils. Write to our MP, Michael Gove. Let us ensure that this explosion of proposed new building is managed properly at inception, and sufficiently & appropriately accommodated into this part of the world.

We have to act now, or we will certainly regret it.


Oh, by the way, Merry Christmas everybody.



.

Lock, Stock & Two Smoking Barrels - The Lightwater Campaign

Friday 7th December.

So the #BattleofLightwater is over, with a Conservative win, lock, stock & barrel.
@KatiaMalcaus Cooper was returned last night as the new Parish Councillor for Lightwater West with what can only be described as a massive majority of the vote against the stalwart efforts of her Labour Party opponent.

The numbers pretty much tell the story. 346 for Mrs Cooper and 81 for Mr Wilson, which equates to a 81/19% split from a 23.6% turnout.
Seemingly, despite a fairly bitterly fought campaign both online and on the ground, on the day the result was rarely in doubt. Telling numbers suggested a 2/1 split for most of the day, with the only 'heart-in-the-mouth' moment coming upon the opening of the postal votes, which appeared to be fairly evenly split; and an ill-tempered agent calling for several of us counters to switch off our phones at one point. (It turns out that the use of phones isn't against the rules as it happens. However, the taking of photographs during the actual counting of the votes, is. None of us were guilty on that score).

So, what should be taken from this result and this recent campaign?
Firstly, Labour can't win in a seat such as this. Despite early indications of a low turnout and early campaigning successes by the Labour candidate, it would appear that a socialist candidate, however community minded on the face of it is not a popular choice for this demographic section. It should be noted that Lightwater has in the past elected Liberal Democrats, but it would appear from last night that those votes didn't vote Labour. Adjusting for turnout, Wilson gathered fewer than the share of votes cast for the previous Liberal Democrat candidate, who was also unsucessful. I made the point to Wilson early on that his only chance electorally in this part of the world was to stand as an Independent candidate due to the fact that Surrey Tories generally don't vote red. Even extremely disaffected & disillusioned historic Conservative voters don't cross the electoral floor to that degree.

Secondly, votes cannot be taken for granted and strong campaigning remains of paramount importance. Nothwithstanding the above, I believe there were two main points where the Labour support faltered. Mr Wilson's comments regards The Briars Centre and some subsequent online nastiness proved to be a turn-off for many floating voters late last week; and the efforts of the enormous Conservative Party machine which gathered momentum at the same time, culminating in a #barrage of attention & information for the stalwart Conservative electors on voting day itself. These two elements resulted in a greater turnout of Conservatives on the night, which naturally increased the gap between the two candidates.

But could Wilson have won? Given the historic numbers, it was going to take a strong campaign and a similarly strong following wind to carry his victory. But early campaign successes certainly pointed towards a much closer contest as evidenced by the postal votes, which by my estimation last night were almost equal in share. Similarly, this time of year generally discourages voters at the polling stations and a much lower turnout would have handed an advantage to Labour on the basis that on those occasions it is generally only people with political interest who do go to the polls. And the people who are dragged out of their beds to vote when its deemed to be close.

In the event, this sort of debrief is for the party back-offices to worry themselves about ahead of the next elections. Lightwater remains in the hands of the Conservative Party for another session and seemingly forever.
It remains to be seen just what the remaining political forces in this area now decide to do about that.


Now, off to the post office.

Lightwater Boomerang

Tuesday 27th November

Over the years I've for the most part stayed out of local planning matters. Coming from a background of property interests and coupled with a former appointment as Chariman of Planning at SCC, it has been simpler to keep my own counsel on local planning matters, and leave the representation to the proper councillors; i.e. the local Borough Councillors or alternatively share my thoughts individually with interested parties.

However, there are a number of local planning issues that have recently aroused so much local interest that I suspect that silence on the respective matters may seem odd.
Tesco, of course is one of these.
The planning circumstances around this series of planning applications are well documented in the local press and across the internet, but to the lay reader, Tesco have applied for planning consent to change the current 'Lightwater Homecare' site into a Tesco store. You might recall that 'Lightwater Homecare' was the subject of a televsion programme a few years ago, and it would seem that the owner has finally decided to call it a day and sell the premises to the supermarket giant.

Nothing wrong with that of course. That is how business works, and indeed, how the development business works, with renewal a vital feature of both. However, as in Chobham recently, there has been a considerable local opposition to the proposals, with both of the recent planning applications and an appeal to the planning inspector having been refused and dismissed respectively.

What is interesting about the latest refusal, which occurred at Monday evening's planning committee at SHBC, is the manner of the refusal and the grounds upon which the refusal has been made.

Tesco returned with a subsequent application after the original appeal was dismissed. For the most part, it appears the past concerns of both the borough officers and the appeal inspector had been met and the borough officers had consequently recommended the proposal for approval. i.e. to grant the consent. However, the committee disagreed on the basis of highways grounds, which is a technical point and can be 'designed out' in a subsequent application.
What was not included in the refusal were any other planning grounds (competition is not a valid planning reason) including the opening hours which are now therefore deemed to be acceptable.

There were celebrations in Lightwater on Monday evening after the planning committee meeting closed. These I suspect are somewhat premature.

Tesco will be back.

Flashmac

Friday 2nd November

I remember going to a job interview once with a Kensington based firm of chartered surveyors & valuers and subsequently being offered the job with a conditional offer.
The conditional aspect, of which there was only one element, was specified by the managing director of the firm - a vast, ex-tank commander cavalry colonel - which was to shave my 'Van Dyk' beard.
Apparently because and according to the tanker, 'only Navy Men wore beards'.
In spite of hailing from a naval family myself, I accepted the condition and took the role on, clean-shaven for the first time in several years, taking my place among the other clean-shaven managerial ranks. And naturally, the moment I departed - which ended up being several years later - I grew it back.

The reasons that us chaps decide to grow facial hair are as varied as the various designs that you see on us in the street. My personal reason is not one of lassitude, of religion, or of fashion. No, mine is generally one of a benign vanity, worn in a vain attempt to recover a chiselled jawline long since departed.
It doesn't actually work to that effect, but I've now grown used to it; my wife also prefers me to wear it since frankly, without it, I frighten the children.

The reason for writing about this subject is not because I suspect you would be interested about my facial hair growth, but rather because of the annual fund-raiser that is 'Movember'.
Started in 2003, the aim of the campaign is to support the Prostate Cancer charities for Prostate Cancer by means of growing a 'Mo' (a moustache) specifically raising awareness in a similar way to the pink ribbons one sees for Breast Cancer & other cancer awareness campaigns. Naturally, being chaps, we have to take it one stage further than the ladies, so for the last few years 'Movember' has spread around the world with chaps being sponsored for more and more outlandish moustache designs.

Typically, I've generally sponsored friends to do it, but this year I thought I'd have a go myself. And since I've worn a 'mo' as part of my beard for years, I've decided to attempt to extend my existing 'mo' and grow some 'Harry Flashman' cavalry whiskers in support.

If you are interested in supporting for this charity, do please do visit my very own Mo page

And if you suddenly see Tom Selleck - or even 'Private Walker' - impersonators springing up all over the place, now you'll know the reason why.

New Besom

Wednesday 31st October

I bumped into Mrs Katia Malcaus Cooper this week at a children's Hallowe'en Party at the Briar's Community Centre in Lightwater West.

Katia is standing for election to the Windlesham Parish Council next month, which as you know, is a parish that includes the three villages of Windlesham, Bagshot & Lightwater.

I know Katia both personally & professionally. She is a friend of a very good friend of mine, we have children of similar ages and we have met on a number of social occasions. Most recently mine & Katia's paths have crossed in respect of funding streams for the Briar's Community Centre in Lightwater, the committee for which Katia was recently Chair of.
On that occasion the County Council was able to make funds available to assist the first phase of the renovation of the centre, which was starting to show signs of poor repair, certainly unsustainable for use by children.

I'm delighted that Katia has decided to stand for election in Lightwater West this time and I wish her every success. As a local Lightwater West resident, her interest in and subsequent leadership of the committee at the Briar's Centre proved to be very capable, with determination and good spirits displayed in equal measure.
More importantly than that is that Katia showed that she has local interests very much at heart. While standing beneath a Conservative banner, she is not a career politician; she is not standing to grandstand on issues in order to facilitate a career in local politics. Katia is simply a very committed local resident looking to benefit the residents of her local community.

And in this business, and in this part of the world, I must say that I find that outlook particularly refreshing.

Lucky Lightwater West.
Good luck Katia!

Terminal Signs

Friday 26th October.

There was a time when I didn't get quite so excited about road signs.
The fact that I now do is perhaps itself the sign that I need to get out of this business.

Maybe.

But in the meantime I'll try to contain my excitement and deliver some further news about the Speed Limit Terminal Signs soon to be erected on my very street.
And if you live on Lightwater Road or Red Road, yours too.

When a speed limit changes in the UK, the local highways authority - in our case Surrey County Council - are obliged to make the change very clear to motorists by way of 'Terminal Signs'. While repeater signs are designed to remind motorists of the limit in which they are driving, Terminal Signs are much larger, showing the change of a limit in a much bolder manner.

At the southern end of MacDonald Road, near to where I live, these signs are actually 80 metres or so from the Red Road junction; a consequence of when my house and those of my immediate neighbours weren't then constructed.
(If you squint at the photograph above, you might just be able to see them...)
As a result of that construction, 'our' element of the road is no longer deemed to be 'rural' and the location of the existing signs is no longer appropriate. Not only that, but it now transpires that there are new regulations which indicate exactly where these signs should be. And these signs aren't there.
So, as a result of the forthcoming speed limit change, county officers are now looking at relocating them at the mouth of the Red Road junction and I'm hopeful that such a move may slow the traffic along this stretch and lessen the junction collisions.

All I need to do now is 'sell' the idea to my neighbours...





NOTE: As the police will confirm, parked cars are in fact one of the best speed reducers, which is why you'll often find one of ours parked in the street.