Popeye's

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 17 Dec 2005, 20:10

From today's EN:

Cafe faces closure over tables row

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 17 Dec 2005, 23:46

Any reason why he thinks he should be exempt from sticking to the rules?

ecm · Post by **ecm** » 18 Dec 2005, 04:02

Epykat wrote:Any reason why he thinks he should be exempt from sticking to the rules?

Perhaps cos in this instance, like in so may others, the rules are just plain wrong?

My Mum and Aunt (combined ages of 165 years) love Popeyes and, having been there a couple of times with them, I can see why.
Easy access for oldies with zimmers and sticks, great service, lovely coffee and nice pastries.
The times I've been there with Mum, the guys behind the counter were so attentive and nothing seemed too much trouble for them.

Why not give the owner the appropriate licence and be done with it? He's been operating as a cafe for long enough and seems well enough established as such.

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 18 Dec 2005, 10:19

the committee claims Portobello High Street is losing too many shops, so Mr Al-Saady's application should be refused.

eh? it's losing too many shops, so it should lose another shop? that's such typical bureucracy - if on paper it looks like we're losing a shop, we must act to save the shop even if in the real world it means forcing a shop out of business!

Patently ridiculous. Are any of our local councillors involved in planning? Do they realise how popular this shop/cafe/restaurant/retail unit/whatever is ?

This nice man should get to keep providing the good service he does.

Robin! · Post by **Robin!** » 18 Dec 2005, 11:45

That is absolutely scandalous, stuffy coucil and there pathetic little stupid rules. Sorry I'm mad about this I go there nearly every week.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 18 Dec 2005, 12:23

I think that to fully understand this situation, and the recommendation for refusal, you need to look at the planning application and the two sub-committee reports in particular. You also have to see it from the point of view of other traders - see letter of objection from Roma.

It may seem like bureaucracy but planning regulations and constraints, including Policy S5, are designed to safeguard the vitality of our High Street and to protect the amenity of local residents.

132 Portobello High Street

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 18 Dec 2005, 14:40

Of course Roma would object - they are the competition for Popeye's!

I can only speak for myself, but having read the incredibly weak objection from Roma, I am minded to buy my coffees and rolls exclusively from Popeye from now on - as a gesture of solidarity to Popeyes on the one hand, and as an objection to Roma's objection on the other.

Roma don't have room for any tables in their premises - so why complain about a market they have no share in? Why attempt to smear their competition as "illegal" traders?

Support Popeye's !!!

Matthew

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 18 Dec 2005, 22:08

So if Popeyes was crap would you still be supporting the fact that he's flouted the rules? I'm sure he's a very nice man and it's a very nice cafe but if everybody else has to go by the book then so should he.

Post by **wangi** » 18 Dec 2005, 22:34

But the book is wrong, it's that simple. The reasoning applied here is bizarre.

Consider too the empty unit on the corner of the High St and Bath St - the council want more shops, there are too many restaurants/cafes we can assume by their rhetoric... So a restaurant application for the site would no doubt be refused. Thank you very much.

The council needs to focus. It is not their job to dictate the commercial make of a street. By all means provide incentives to promote their vision, but to shut down a business because it's not a shop... when the street has many an empty shop! If the cafe premises do not meet health & safety requirements for the number of tables then enforce the safety requirement.

City of Edinburgh Council played a similar gme earlier this year in Tollcross - they felt the area had "too many cafes" - if the area can support them then there are not too many.

Pal of Porty · Post by **Pal of Porty** » 19 Dec 2005, 13:40

I too have used Popeye's and found the service to be very friendly and helpful but I cannot see how this negates the need to be properly licenced.

Obtaining the appropriate permission of use for any retail site is of paramount importance and even impacts on the site's valuation and hence rental value. Whether the rules are correct or not is a fair discussion to have, but every retailer should know exactly what the current rules are for their type of business and apply them accordingly. Without doubt it can give a competetive advantage over the businesses that spend time, money and energy on meeting the regulations.

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 19 Dec 2005, 14:10

This shop should be defended against closure.

Forcing someone to apply for a license that you know you will turn down is the very definition of bureaucratic tyranny.

What harm will be done by allowing this business to continue? NIL

What good will be done by forcing this business to close? NONE

Roma's objection is a bitter cherry on the top of a very unfair cake. In my opinion, both they and the council should instead be served humble pie.

Franck · Post by **Franck** » 19 Dec 2005, 15:35

I've never been into Popeyes in Porty simply because the one in Leith is rank...picture 10 Leithers smoking fags and drinking tea whilst your BLT is being prepared-its not nice(And I'm a smoker)

Can you light up in the Porty branch?

Anyway, its bit cheeky to operate for such a duration without the proper consent, but they seem to have become part of the community thats used by locals, so whats the problem?

I do go into Roma once and a while, and obviously they are going to complain, but I would hope they would have no impact on the decision...we live and work in a free market and a bit of competition does no harm.

btw, what does Mrs Laviolette think the benfits of objecting to the COU but not the tables and chairs? A nice clothing boutique where you can ponder your cardigan outside?

Pal of Porty · Post by **Pal of Porty** » 19 Dec 2005, 15:39

Dadaist wrote:...Forcing someone to apply for a license that you know you will turn down is the very definition of bureaucratic tyranny....

I could not agree more with that sentiment but still believe that each retailer should operate with the appropriate license.

Robin! · Post by **Robin!** » 19 Dec 2005, 19:39

Dadaist wrote:This shop should be defended against closure.

Forcing someone to apply for a license that you know you will turn down is the very definition of bureaucratic tyranny.

What harm will be done by allowing this business to continue? NIL

What good will be done by forcing this business to close? NONE

Roma's objection is a bitter cherry on the top of a very unfair cake. In my opinion, both they and the council should instead be served humble pie.

Well put!

Roma is pretty poor IMO.

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 23 Dec 2005, 08:21

*stop press*

As far as I understand it, agreement has been reached with the council. No change of use but they can keep their tables.

Well done Popeye's. I applaud your sportsmanlike conduct in the face of some rather soor plums.

ecm · Post by **ecm** » 23 Dec 2005, 08:40

That's excellent news.
A lot of folks will be chuffed with that sensible decision.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 23 Dec 2005, 13:36

Robin! wrote:
Roma is pretty poor IMO.

They have the best catered soup in Porty but their sandwich fillings swim in mayo.

If you wish a nice sandwich, Fords have really smartened up their act with the made to order baguettes. Tuna salad without butter is muy bueno.

Pal of Porty · Post by **Pal of Porty** » 23 Dec 2005, 13:43

Dadaist wrote:As far as I understand it, agreement has been reached with the council. No change of use but they can keep their tables.Well done Popeye's. I applaud your sportsmanlike conduct in the face of some rather soor plums.

Excellent - now they can continue to give good service without fear of any Council backlash.

Pal of Porty · Post by **Pal of Porty** » 02 Feb 2006, 14:03

I noticed today that Roma have put a table and chairs into their takeaway premises. They have obviously decided that because Popeye was flouting the law, they will too. Table anarchy will be rife throughout Portobello now. Mortgage and a cappucino anyone?

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 02 Feb 2006, 14:29

Pal of Porty wrote:I noticed today that Roma have put a table and chairs into their takeaway premises. They have obviously decided that because Popeye was flouting the law, they will too. Table anarchy will be rife throughout Portobello now. Mortgage and a cappucino anyone?

I want to be served a mocha in the shoe repair shop, so that I can enjoy the married flavours of coffee and chocolate in an atmosphere of metal filings and glue.

Ed · Post by Ed » 02 Feb 2006, 15:41

Pal of Porty wrote:I noticed today that Roma have put a table and chairs into their takeaway premises. They have obviously decided that because Popeye was flouting the law, they will too. Table anarchy will be rife throughout Portobello now. Mortgage and a cappucino anyone?

Maybe you will soon be able to get coffee (illegally of course) from the chair shop.

OK, we don't have a chair shop but pretend we do for the purpose of this joke

foxy · Post by **foxy** » 02 Feb 2006, 18:56

Dadaist wrote: I want to be served a mocha in the shoe repair shop, so that I can enjoy the married flavours of coffee and chocolate in an atmosphere of metal filings and glue.

You actually like the smell in a shoe repair shop

does it have to be one that cuts keys as well