Lidl proposed for Swords

Bluetonic

jenga-jen wrote: »

If purely to prevent you from quoting other posters and merely rubbising their opinions.

They are my opinions, which I am entitled to and you are entitled to rubbish.

There is a lot of sentimental drivel here about Savages. As I said multiple times already what is their to worry about is Savages are so good and Lidl are so poor?

After all Superquinn and Dunnes run parallel in the Pavillions with successful profits. Perhaps it's a case that Savages and Lidl are a little bit more similar that people would let on.

Afraid of a little competition?

Wishbone Ash

Dizzyblonde wrote: »

their regular customers very much come into play in their model

Of course they do. No one is disputing that. Their regular customers come into play because that is how their bottom line is made. If their regulars were not making it profitable, they wouldn't stay open to accomodate them.

Ryanair has millions of regular and loyal customers but I've never heard anyone say that they put the customer first.

jenga-jen

Bluetonic wrote: »

After profit.

They didn't make €2m profit after tax and expenses in 2008 without putting profits first.

A fair point in so far as proving that they are a successful and profitable business. However, such figures give you no idea of their profit margins etc and you also need to take into account that in all likelihood JCs overheads would be quite low as I suspect they own their premises at this stage.

Putting profits first is a very one dimensional statement and no business can survive on this alone. I've seen businesses die on the back of this attitude.

All that's being said here is that a business has to consider both PROFITS and CUSTOMER SATISFACTION in order to survive.

JCs is merely being used as an example of a business which is clearly doing so.

jenga-jen

Bluetonic wrote: »

They are my opinions, which I am entitled to and you are entitled to rubbish.

There is a lot of sentimental drivel here about Savages. As I said multiple times already what is their to worry about is Savages are so good and Lidl are so poor?

After all Superquinn and Dunnes run parallel in the Pavillions with successful profits. Perhaps it's a case that Savages and Lidl are a little bit more similar that people would let on.

Afraid of a little competition?

Dizzyblonde was in no way spouting sentimental drivel in relation to her discussion of JCs merely an accurate representation of the culture that has been fostered in the area as a result of the exact business model to which you keep referring.

I think you'll find that there is less of a fear of competition and more of a fear of the disruption that putting a Lidl at that location will cause to the area. Anyone living the Swords area will know full well the effect this will have on local infrastructure.

With such a vehement attitude to this Blue tonic, it makes me wonder if you have a vested interest in this Lidl or are a local resident?

Wishbone Ash

jenga-jen wrote: »

Lidl is a fantastic chain and would be a welcome addition to the area

I don't want the impression to go out that I'm pro Lidl or anti JC's. I don't really shop in either so I'm looking at it objectively.

In fairness to JC, he must have the only independent supermarket of that size in the country so he must be doing something right and should have little to worry about.

Bluetonic

jenga-jen wrote: »

All that's being said here is that a business has to consider both PROFITS and CUSTOMER SATISFACTION in order to survive.

Fair enough profits in conjunction with customer satisfaction as switching costs in the retail market are zero for the consumer.

So what threat do Lidl pose to Savages so?

Bluetonic

jenga-jen wrote: »

Anyone living the Swords area will know full well the effect this will have on local infrastructure.

How many more traffic movements will there be from Lidl over the current garage? Lets say per day?

jenga-jen wrote: »

With such a vehement attitude to this Blue tonic, it makes me wonder if you have a vested interest in this Lidl or are a local resident?

Yes as well as working for Luke Moriarity (see previous posts), I also have a vested interest in Lidl. Is it not possible to discuss something without having to have a vested interest?

Given the current use of the site and the excellence of Savages I don't see what the objections are based on?

jenga-jen

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

I don't want the impression to go out that I'm pro Lidl or anti JC's. I don't really shop in either so I'm looking at it objectively.

In fairness to JC, he must have the only independent supermarket of that size in the country so he must be doing something right and should have little to worry about.

BlueTonic wrote:

Fair enough profits in conjunction with customer satisfaction as switching costs in the retail market are zero for the consumer.

So what threat do Lidl pose to Savages so?

It's a fair point that on paper there's nothing to stop the two operating side by side.

I just suspect that you are unaware that there is an enormous volume of traffic on the roads around JCs currently, rising to an insane amount at Christmas.

The site on which they've proposed to put in Lidl is currently a garage. And from experience you can be anything up to 5-6 minutes waiting for a break in traffic to enter/exit the garage at present.

Given this current setup and the fact that the garage is adjacent to a junction and hence would not be an ideal place for traffic lights, the addition of a Lidl to the area would result in very heavy traffic volumes and disruption for local residents.

I think, IMO, it would be unwise of Lidl to open and operate in an area where there could be intense or growing public resentment of their presence. That to me is not a very savvy business model at all.

Larianne

I live in the area.

JRCC wrote: »

I haven’t looked at the application but based on the comments, I would raise the following points.

That there is already a shop/service station on the site I would suggest the planners will consider the current use. There is also quite clearly traffic movement in and out of the site at the moment. That includes the HGV traffic that someone mentioned earlier. Obviously delivery of the fuel and stock for the shop is done by HGV. I would suggest that there will not be much additional traffic movement in and out of the site in comparison to what happens there at the moment. In fact, I would say that the current flow of traffic is more intensive as there is more of a turnover. People go in, fill up, pay and leave. I could be wrong but that's what I believe on the face of it.
There will definitely be an increase in traffic volume. People will come from all over Swords and surrounding areas to shop in Lidl as the nearest Lidl store is either Santry or Finglas (?) There will be more HGV traffic as it will be a larger store with many different suppliers. So that will be an increase to the vehicles that already supply JC's.

As for the Woodies site being a better location. For who? That location will not be considered sustainable for retail until the METRO North project is delivered. It is outside the central core of the town, on the far side of the Swords bypass and would be primarily accessed by car. We have to get real and move away from a reliance on private transport to go to the shops. Most people would use a car to do their shopping, no? Lidl is more a place someone would go to to buy their weekly shopping rather than a litre of milk. The Woodies site is a great location for the store. Excellent road access.

The junction at Rathbeale Road and Brackenstown Avenue is bad enough at times to cross but if Lidl goes ahead it will be a nightmare for residents in that area to get in and out of their houses/estates. Saturdays and busier times like Christmas is a nightmare.

I know it may be unpopular to say but in planning terms the Rathbeale Road location does seem to be the optimal location for a medium size retail outlet because of the amount of residential development in the area. It is making the area more like a sustainable development because it is bringing services into the community as opposed to bringing the community out of the area to avail of the services.Yes, it is located in the central of a residential area but this means that it will also affect this area. Traffic will get much busier along Rathbeale Road which is already dangerous to cross. And Brackenstown road will end up getting more traffic volume. With the number of proposed parking spaces it will end up people will park up along residential roads.

My suggestion would be that you don’t just to call on the outright rejection of the application but call for the inclusion of additional conditions to the permission granted by the council. For example, if traffic movement is your concern, request that a pedestrian crossing be located adjacent to the site at the expense of the applicant. This will act both as a traffic calming measure and ensure safe pedestrian movement in and around the site. If it’s at the expense of the applicant it means public money will not be used to enhance the safety around this private retail development.
There should really already be a pedestrian crossing at that junction already. There has been quite a few accidents in the area in the past.

As for asking TDs to intervene. They have no influence over planning matters; they’re not even members of the council. They can make a submission the same as you can. By all means contact your local councillors as they can raise the matter at the Area Committee meeting dealing with planning matters in the Swords area. Again, they have no influence on the outcome but they can put the feeling in the community forward to the planners.
There was a meeting last week with Clare Daly and I read in the Fingal that there's another one on 8th April in The Star pub (I think).

Finally, the point made in regard to the impact the development will have on JC’s is valid but it is ultimately the market that will determine which outlet will flourish or not. JC’s is established and has a lot more variety available to the customer than Lidl has (Dunnes Stores, Florists etc). JC’s also has a loyal customer base. However, if they don’t amend their business plan to stay in that position, they will lose business to Lidl. Overall, competition in the retail sector is good for the consumer so the people will see the benefit in the long run.
JC's is taking part in that new Fergal Quinn programme. I think it was to be shown next Tuesday. But with JC's passing I guess they will defer it.

jenga-jen

Bluetonic wrote: »

How many more traffic movements will there be from Lidl over the current garage? Lets say per day?


Yes as well as working for Luke Moriarity (see previous posts), I also have a vested interest in Lidl. Is it not possible to discuss something without having to have a vested interest?

Given the current use of the site and the excellence of Savages I don't see what the objections are based on?

I in no way meant to imply that a person cannot discuss something without a vested interest.

However, the vehemence of your responses caused me to infer that you did in fact have such an interest.

I think you'd find that on a daily basis and indeed at peak times such as Christmas the number of movements at the garage will in no way be comparable to the movements caused by a Lidl in that location given that it will in all likelihood draw customers from a large area.

The use of the site as a garage, which is in competition with at least 3 other petrol stations in the immediate Swords area, is in no way a comparison to its use as a chain supermarket which I suspect wouldn't even be opening if it wasn't expecting large volumes of customers.

I merely weighed in on the JCs side of the argument as it seemed, due to to this vested interest IMO, that you were dismissing out of hand the goodwill/customer loyalty side of the argument as raised by DizzyBlonde.

Yes Lidl would be an excellent addition to the area but I think they will find enormous opposition from the local community and in my experience that's usually not the best way to start a business in a community such as Swords.

There is a site available where woodies used to be equidistant from Swords village with a large amount of space and sufficient access. The feeling I've gotten as a resident is that many locals would prefer it there and not in an area where it will cause such a massive disruption.

Bluetonic

jenga-jen wrote: »

I think, IMO, it would be unwise of Lidl to open and operate in an area where there could be intense or growing public resentment of their presence. That to me is not a very savvy business model at all.

I'm familiar with the site and indeed familiar with Savages, it having been the shopping destination of choice during the 1980's pre-Quinnsworth in Balbriggan.

Lidl first made submissions to FCC saying they wanted to open in Swords in 2003. You can take it they would have already held pre-planning meetings with FCC prior to submission and already been given a nod based on this site, as thats how it works. Unless there is a serious (very serious) objections based on something which FCC haven't already seen I doubt this will be going anyway other than granted.

jenga-jen

Bluetonic wrote: »

I'm familiar with the site and indeed familiar with Savages, it having been the shopping destination of choice during the 1980's pre-Quinnsworth in Balbriggan.

Lidl first made submissions to FCC saying they wanted to open in Swords in 2003. You can take it they would have already held pre-planning meetings with FCC prior to submission and already been given a nod based on this site, as thats how it works. Unless there is a serious (very serious) objections based on something which FCC haven't already seen I doubt this will be going anyway other than granted.

I think that given my familiarity with both the local area, the supermarket and site in question and indeed the general feeling building among local residents that there would appear to be a fight on Lidl's hands going forward.

FCC love to encourage new business into the area but in my experience don't tend to do so at the expense of the local community.

I will be watching the situation with interest in the coming months as the general feeling seems to be that the locals DO want a Lidl but they want it at a site such as the one on which the former Woodies stood on, where there is sufficient access and parking with minimal disruption to the locals.

Certainly business models, local competition and customer loyalty aside this would be where I would weigh in on the argument as it wouldn't appear to make any sense for Lidl to go in on the Rathbeale Road.

They may find that local people who have to brave the traffic on that road to get two the two establishments will go to JCs anyway out of this (allegedly misguided) loyalty in which case there is nothing for Lidl to gain from opening there.

Wishbone Ash

jenga-jen wrote: »

I think they will find enormous opposition from the local community and in my experience that's usually not the best way to start a business in a community such as Swords

I think Lidl will be weighing up the greater community rather than the people of Swords. There are tens of thousands of us who live in surrounding towns/villages in the greater Fingal area. We have no particular attachment to Swords but have to access it regularly as it is our nearest large urban centre. I'm sure Lidl will be taking us into account in their research.

jenga-jen wrote:

There is a site available where woodies used to be equidistant from Swords village with a large amount of space and sufficient access. The feeling I've gotten as a resident is that many locals would prefer it there and not in an area where it will cause such a massive disruption.

And, as I said earlier, many of us 'outsiders' would prefer that site too.

Bluetonic

Just for the sake of correct information the site is bigger than just the current garage site. It seems to be ample based on requirement for shops of this size (details available from FCC), so therefore can't see that becoming a planning issue.

Also two objections in three weeks doesn't seem to be too many (granted a few might be pending or not uploaded yet). One objections based purely on the fact that they don't want the garage closed!!

jenga-jen

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

I think Lidl will be weighing up the greater community rather than the people of Swords. There are tens of thousands of us who live in surrounding towns/villages in the greater Fingal area. We have no particular attachment to Swords but have to access it regularly as it is our nearest large urban centre. I'm sure Lidl will be taking us into account in their research.

And, as I said earlier, many of us 'outsiders' would prefer that site too.

Without a doubt you're right Wishbone, sorry most of that post was directed at BlueTonic and I quoted you to show I wasn't ignoring your reply!

I think your reply sums up the situation.

If Lidl were aiming for only Swords, then Rathbeale is the wrong place as locals will object due to traffic, disruption etc. I doubt the Woodies site would receive any objections.

If they're aiming for a wider catchment area then surely the old Woodies site is more convenient as it's more accessible? If I didn't live in Swords, I wouldn't volunteer to drive through it or anywhere near the Rathbeale Road on a Saturday afternoon.

It's not a 'LIDL OUT' situation, everyone would be glad of a Lidl whether it's in competition or not. However, we all want it in a place where it's easily accessible and becomes an asset and not an affliction!

jenga-jen

Bluetonic wrote: »

Just for the sake of correct information the site is bigger than just the current garage site. It seems to be ample based on requirement for shops of this size (details available from FCC), so therefore can't see that becoming a planning issue.

Also two objections in three weeks doesn't seem to be too many (granted a few might be pending or not uploaded yet). One objections based purely on the fact that they don't want the garage closed!!

I think you'll find that word of Lidl opening is only starting to filter through in the local area. I would be surprised if more objections aren't raised and I've heard word of protests and petitions in the area as well.

It would seem, IMO, that you're missing the point to an extent about the location for this Lidl. Nobody will object because it's in competition with JCs and nobody will object because it might not have ample parking etc.

The main issue in this case is the traffic and the impact that putting at Lidl at the aforementioned site will have on the local area.

As other posters have mentioned, at peak times, access to and from housing estates in the area is limited and difficult. The road is already quite dangerous and there has been at least one death, I believe literally opposite the garage site.

Given that Lidl will indeed draw more customers and hence greater traffic volumes, what measures would you propose to minimise the impact on the local residents?

Or is it, as it seems, the case that if the site's big enough then that isn't your concern?

PCros

jenga-jen wrote: »

As other posters have mentioned, at peak times, access to and from housing estates in the area is limited and difficult. The road is already quite dangerous and there has been at least one death, I believe literally opposite the garage site.

I've lived in that area all my life and there has been about a dozen deaths on that stretch and plus hundreds of crashes big and small.

PCros

Bluetonic wrote: »

Naivety comes into play if you think Savages put the customer first. They put margins first or else they would have gone out of business back in the 1980s.

The fact that your a regular customer doesn't come into play to their model.

Fair enough if you want to get sentimental on the issue but as I said already if Savages are what the customer wants then Lidl shouldn't be an issue.

You obviously dont know the supermarket and JC himself to have the balls to say that.

Dizzyblonde

PCros wrote: »

I've lived in that area all my life and there has been about a dozen deaths on that stretch and plus a hundreds of crashes big and small.

Well if that isn't a good enough reason to locate a new supermarket elsewhere then I don't know what is, because there's no scope for widening the Rathbeale road.
There's plenty of room for Lidl in Swords - and Aldi too - but not on the Rathbeale road

Larianne

PCros wrote: »

I've lived in that area all my life and there has been about a dozen deaths on that stretch and plus a hundreds of crashes big and small.

Yep loads.

And yes unfortunately there was a serious incident a few years back where a guy was coming out of the garage on his scooter and car coming in. He died from serious head injuries.

Edit: Just checked the Fingal and the follow up meeting is on at 8pm, 8th April in The Star pub.

PCros

I just want to reiterate that this post has nothing to do with competition, it seems to be swaying that way.

It's about the lack of planning and the effect on traffic that this proposal will have.

Bluetonic

jenga-jen wrote: »

Given that Lidl will indeed draw more customers and hence greater traffic volumes, what measures would you propose to minimise the impact on the local residents?

I feel this will answer your questions.

The planning has been submitted as the site has been deemed ideal, planning is more likely to go ahead than not. Of course it still might be rejected or appealed but it more then likely will go ahead.

Dizzyblonde

PCros wrote: »

I just want to reiterate that this post has nothing to do with competition, it seems to be swaying that way.

It's about the lack of planning and the effect on traffic that this proposal will have.

Absolutely. The fact that as a regular customer of JC's I gave an opinion about Lidl opening next door is neither here nor there, and hardly grounds for objection.

The heavier traffic would at the very least be an inconvenience, and at most a danger.

Bluetonic

PCros wrote: »

You obviously dont know the supermarket and JC himself to have the balls to say that.

This has already been discussed on this thread.

PCros

Bluetonic wrote: »

I feel this will answer your questions.

The planning has been submitted as the site has been deemed ideal, planning is more likely to go ahead than not. Of course it still might be rejected or appealed but it more then likely will go ahead.

Those counts are a bit dubious to say the least.

Its a petrol station of which there are a dozen or so in the Swords area! This will be the only Lidl in the Swords area and people from the outlying towns as mentioned before will make the trip out increasing the traffic already on that stretch.

They wouldnt make the trip out to that garage just for petrol!

Larianne

Bluetonic wrote: »

I feel this will answer your questions.

The planning has been submitted as the site has been deemed ideal, planning is more likely to go ahead than not. Of course it still might be rejected or appealed but it more then likely will go ahead.

That report is a joke. The traffic will increase, much more and it's going to be a pain in the ass for residents.

Bluetonic

Dizzyblonde wrote: »

Absolutely. The fact that as a regular customer of JC's I gave an opinion about Lidl opening next door is neither here nor there, and hardly grounds for objection.

The heavier traffic would at the very least be an inconvenience, and at most a danger.

You didn't start to mention traffic until your later posts? You were all about JCs customer service in your first objections?

jenga-jen

Bluetonic wrote: »

I feel this will answer your questions.

The planning has been submitted as the site has been deemed ideal, planning is more likely to go ahead than not. Of course it still might be rejected or appealed but it more then likely will go ahead.

Thanks for the link BlueTonic.

While this does in fact clear up a lot of my questions, I think the proposal would be laughed at by the locals to suggest that 17:00-18:00 (tea-time) is the peak time at which to preform a 'manual traffic count'.

I'd also be interested to know what this count entails.

Having working in audit and read through the investigations in that report I can tell you, from experience, that your sample would not appear to be sufficient or accurate in terms of its representation of the local area and its traffic volumes.

I would suspect that part of the suitability of this particular site lies in the fact that there will be nowhere nearby for an Aldi to set up in competition However, I also feel that if Aldi were to make the seemingly wiser, albeit perhaps costlier, choice to take the Woodies site further down the line then they will have the last laugh.

While I fully respect that you have a more detailed knowledge of the planning application for this Lidl and its intricacies given your involvement, I still do believe that you are not completely in touch with the actual situation in Swords, specifically in relation to general community feeling and more worryingly the actual traffic volumes.

I would respectfully suggest that you make 2 visits to the area. One on a Thursday evening between 17:00 and 21:30 to observe late night shopping volumes and also on a Saturday between 09:00 and 19:00 to fully understand the challenge that Lidl are facing in that area.

Bluetonic

Just to make it clear, I'm just playing Devils Advocate here.

I feel too that the Woodies site would be ideal (maybe lacking footfall by public transport which is a big thing now), but it has a good chance of getting planning permission on the current site.

Dizzyblonde

Bluetonic wrote: »

You didn't start to mention traffic until your later posts? You were all about JCs customer service in your first objections?

I didn't make an objection, merely gave a personal opinion - and I can have an opinion on the traffic situation too. I don't live on the Rathbeale Road but if I did I'd certainly object on the grounds of increased traffic.