Comments

DAMESATHOME@YAHOO.CO.UK
send the Dame your information, discretion assured.
Comments are welcome but do not necessarily reflect the view of the Dame.
Offensive/inappropriate comments will be deleted and the poster banned.

Tuesday, 4 December 2012

STEPHEN BAYLEY LEADS THE BATTLE OF BRITTEN STREET

Schumi's little hairdressing salon in the heart of Chelsea is a unique amalgam: you can have your hair prinked and preened  whilst looking over an eclectic array of artworks...many by local artists. 
It is more than just a salon.... if you are fortunate you might even meet The Dame as she holds court!
CHELSEA LANDMARK
But the future of this mainstay of Chelsea life is under threat and  hundreds of Schumi's loyal and highly articulate clients and friends are backing him in his fightback.

By clicking on the links below you can see why there is so much anger at the way he is being treated. 
This is a battle between the little businessman-providing a vital local service.... and a powerful property developer interested only in maximising profits


3 comments:

  1. Old Mother Hubbard6 December 2012 at 02:13

    This must be short as my dog needs a bone.
    HOWEVER - as a Resident and Taxpayer in my small cupboard, in The Metropolitan Borough of Chelsea, and, since 1965 or so,the awful RBK&C, I am outraged that Councillors (bar one) voted to pass a planning application, violently opposed by those who voted them into office.
    Why, one has to ask, has the decision not been revoked in the face of such massive opposition ?
    The Planning Dept. has received over 1,000 heartfelt pleas to save Schumi's iconic business, so valued and such a unique meeting place for the Artists and Literati of old Chelsea.
    The likes of 'Pooter' would not understand this, but very many of us do.
    What do the Council have to gain from their decision - ONE HAS TO WONDER !!!

    ReplyDelete
  2. David R L Litchfield12 December 2012 at 11:09

    This salon is not an empty premises awaiting development. It is a mans livelihood and as such he should be able to rely on the council's protection. He pays his rates and his taxes. He abides by the law and provides a service which many, particularly, though not exclusively, the older residents find invaluable. The development is a one-off profit creation that will enrich no-one but the developer.
    David R L Litchfield

    ReplyDelete
  3. I find it incredible that councillors see no need in protecting jobs, their dependants and a man's livelihood from greedy, little developers. Surely the councillors, as elected representatives have a duty of responsibility to protect their constituents? One would have thought that after such vocal opposition to the closing of the salon, the Councillors could see this as an opportunity to show support and do something, whereby proving that they do care; yet they sit back and do nothing - blaming everyone else for the problem. I suppose that they may at least generate extra income from taxing the devlopers plan to build another "Fritzel" cellar, but what a waste to such an important chelsea landmark. Bl+++y idiots!

    ReplyDelete

Comments are your responsibility. Anyone posting inappropriate comments shall have their comment removed and will be banned from posting in future. Your IP address may also be recorded and reported. Persistent abuse shall mean comments will be severely restricted in future.