Windmill Victory

[Nigel]

Tim
I really think its time you put your cards on the table - there is NO known health or behavioural problem linked with moderate alcohol consumption in suitable surroundings with suitable people so please stop stating it as a fact .
Plenty of links between excessive and binge drinking with road accidents, illness , domestic violence , mental illness, loss of jobs and risky sexual activity - but for goodness sake leave us moderate drinkers alone.

You are fully entitled to your temperance and abstinence approach and if it gives you happiness then fair play to you, but you can't use fabricated , in fact non-existent, evidence to argue that campaigning to save pubs is negative for any such reason.

You don't strike me as a recovering alcoholic , is it a religious thing ? Perhaps we should publish our weekly Drink Diaries on a new " Give up drinking with Toc H Tim " thread ?

A very good afternoon
Nigel

[Eagle]

A well run Public House is a godsend to a happy and contented community.

Convenience stores selling cheap , mostly rubbish alcohol , are a blot on society.

[Tim Lund]

A well run Public House is a godsend to a happy and contented community.

Same goes for a well run café, restaurant, cinema, etc., etc. They also make enough profits to pay the going rate for commercial premises, so do not require special planning rules.

[Tim Lund]

Tim
I really think its time you put your cards on the table - there is NO known health or behavioural problem linked with moderate alcohol consumption in suitable surroundings with suitable people so please stop stating it as a fact .

I suspect your definition of moderate is a level of alcohol consumption below which there is no problem, although the evidence presented by Horizon was that there are health problems well below currently recommended limits. But this is all beside the point, because I'm quite happy to set the pleasure individuals, including myself, get from moderate alcohol consumption against a relatively low level harm it might - does - cause. What I do object to is policy biased towards those of us who do enjoy alcohol but which denies the costs.

Plenty of links between excessive and binge drinking with road accidents, illness , domestic violence , mental illness, loss of jobs and risky sexual activity - but for goodness sake leave us moderate drinkers alone.

You are fully entitled to your temperance and abstinence approach and if it gives you happiness then fair play to you, but you can't use fabricated , in fact non-existent, evidence to argue that campaigning to save pubs is negative for any such reason.

Perhaps you can give me links to the research which invalidates this clearly existing evidence.

Horizon - 2014-2015: 12. Is Binge Drinking Really That Bad?

You don't strike me as a recovering alcoholic , is it a religious thing ? Perhaps we should publish our weekly Drink Diaries on a new " Give up drinking with Toc H Tim " thread ?

You're quite right - I'm not a recovering alcoholic. If I were to give an account of people I have known whose lives have been blighted by alcohol abuse, either their own or of those close to them, I doubt very much that it would be out of the ordinary. All it would tell you is that I am aware of what goes on round me.

Should I object to the suggestion that someone who points out the risks of alcohol might be a recovering alcoholic? I've heard suggested of one other person on this Forum, simply because he does not drink at all. Seems like a good way to chill discussion of possibly difficult subjects. OTOH, since I'd previously thrown in the word 'befuddled'

These campaigns to save pubs come from a sentimental, befuddled, out of touch older generation, which unfortunately is well represented in our political classes, both locally and nationally.

I'll take it in good part

[Smiffy]

Tim

I appreciate you have never been a great liker of Public Houses.

Surely what all the surveys about alcohol tell us that the problem now is mainly with of sales , not sales under supervision in pubs.

Rather than try to close even more pubs surely we should try to restrict hours that drink can be sold in shops and also tax more heavily of sales than sales in Pubs.

Very sad people boozing at home on their own,. Drinking should be a social activity , never drink on ones own. Very sad.

Drinking doesn't have to be social. Have you never had the place to yourself and relaxed with a beer or two while watching a film or sport on the tv? How about walking into a pub on your own for a pint while you sit and do the crossword? I don't find anything remotely sad about it.

[Nigel]

Tim
You are known for your processing power so I don't think you misunderstand .
If you want to post about the dangers of binge drinking ( thats only one type of unhealthy drinking btw) then fine .

Trouble is you hijack what is essentially a conservation post . I didn't think Mary in her original campaign suggested we save the pub and drink a bottle of vodka each night so why are you bombarding us with your evangelical nonsense ?

When I praise Billings for their excellent ham nobody , pipes up with a " 8 pork pies in one sitting can lead to an embolism " and frankly that's what you are doing .

In your honour I am going to drink half a bottle of Malbec very quickly accompanied by a scotch egg and some crisps , immediately prior to going to bed , thus risking indigestion , cyrhosis and obesity .

If I make it through the night I will wish you a very good morning .
A very good evening
Nigel

[somerandombloke]

Tim

I appreciate you have never been a great liker of Public Houses.

Surely what all the surveys about alcohol tell us that the problem now is mainly with of sales , not sales under supervision in pubs.

Rather than try to close even more pubs surely we should try to restrict hours that drink can be sold in shops and also tax more heavily of sales than sales in Pubs.

Very sad people boozing at home on their own,. Drinking should be a social activity , never drink on ones own. Very sad.

Drinking doesn't have to be social. Have you never had the place to yourself and relaxed with a beer or two while watching a film or sport on the tv? How about walking into a pub on your own for a pint while you sit and do the crossword? I don't find anything remotely sad about it.

God yes. The pub beside Tulse Hill sttation is one Ive been in many times in between trains but hardly ever with someone else. I really like having a pint of ale an a whiskey in therre by myself often with one of them lovely spicey sausage rolls they do. And I like to have an ale or a nice glass of wine at home some eavenings while unwinding after a tough day. I think Eagle is sayin more about himself than he is about the people he thunks are sad cos they drink alone.

Mind you I think Im gonna be overdoing it tonight already emptied a bottle of Prosecco!!!

[Tim Lund]

Tim
You are known for your processing power so I don't think you misunderstand .
If you want to post about the dangers of binge drinking ( thats only one type of unhealthy drinking btw) then fine.

You misunderstand. I was posting about the dangers of having a squatted eyesore on Kirkdale.

It may be Cllr Liam Curran's solution to the housing crisis, but it's not mine.

[Tim Lund]

Here is the judgement rejecting the owner's appeal against the listing as an asset of community value.

http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKFTT/GR ... 4_0011.pdf

The background, given in the first paragraph should help explain the consequences

The Localism Act 2011 requires local authorities to keep a list of assets (meaning buildings or other land) which are of community value. Once an asset is placed on the list it will usually remain there for five years. The effect of listing is that, generally speaking an owner intending to sell the asset must give notice to the local authority. A community interest group then has six weeks in which to ask to be treated as a potential bidder. If it does so, the sale cannot take place for six months.

The theory is that this period known as “the moratorium” will allow the community group to come up with an alternative proposal – although, at the end of the moratorium, it is entirely up to the owner whether a sale goes through, to whom and for how much. There are arrangements for the local authority to pay compensation to an owner who loses money in consequence of the asset being listed.

It doesn't say how long the owner has to sell it having given notice of intention to sell, after the expiry of a six week notice period for expressions of community interest followed by a six month moratorium, but for it to stay listed as an ACV for five years to have any meaning, there must be a limit to how long the owners have to sell.

It wouldn't add much to rehearse my arguments for why this listing is a really bad idea, but some of the details are new, to me at least.

Mr Terry O’Sullivan .. gave evidence at the hearing. He has had a successful career running a number of pubs.
The Windmill, he told me, is the one pub he has had to give back to the owners. He did this by surrendering the lease in 2008. He says he would not want the Windmill now even at a reduced rent.

In July 2004 St Gabriel Properties paid £1.4 million for the freehold. The transaction was financed by a 100% mortgage.

The figures produced by St Gabriel Properties show a turnover of £210,000 a year.

Mr O’Sullivan, who is very experienced in the trade, would be looking for takings of £9,000-£10,000 a week
for the Windmill if he were to make a success of it.

33. On the other hand, the figures produced by St Gabriel Properties to demonstrate a loss of £34,000 p.a. include an interest charge of £64,000 p.a.. I take into account St Gabriel Property’s difficulties but this demonstrates the close connection between profitability and capital valuation. The Windmill is, everyone agrees, expensive to run compared with similar pubs. Figures on profitability are distorted if an asset is made to bear an interest charge which reflects an over valuation. Different figures have been bandied around but at one time there was a suggestion of a sale at £700,000. That would halve the notional interest bill and bring the pub much closer to profitability.

From which we can construct a rough picture of the finances:



However, if, as suggested, the owners accepted that they had overpaid for it, and the mortgage could be halved, that would still leave the pub running at a loss.



In what the judge evidently felt was a heavy handed attempt to draw out the financial consequences

St Gabriel Properties produced two documents said to be a claim for compensation from Lewisham. One indicated that if the review application was successful they would have a compensation claim of about £55,000; the other suggested that if their application was not successful they would have a claim in the region of £124,000.

Heavy handed or not, I can't see that this is a good way to use the Council's ever tightening budget.

[Tim Lund]

Tim
I really think its time you put your cards on the table - there is NO known health or behavioural problem linked with moderate alcohol consumption in suitable surroundings with suitable people so please stop stating it as a fact .

Would you like to take this one up with UK Chief Medical Officers?

New guidelines for alcohol consumption, produced by the UK Chief Medical Officers, warn that drinking any level of alcohol increases the risk of a range of cancers. This is supported by a new review from the Committee on Carcinogenicity (CoC) on alcohol and cancer risk .

New alcohol guidelines show increased risk of cancer

[Manwithaview1]

I saw some workmen inside the other day. #JustSaying

[SteveG85]

Fingers crossed they have something to do with the planning application put in earlier this year...

On a separate but geographically related note, I had an exchange with someone on the council planning/redevelopment team earlier this year regarding the Kirkdale Streetscape Improvements consultation. They confirmed that a preliminary design should be completed later this year, with estimated construction in 2019. Perhaps we will also have a tenant for the Windmill by then!

[SteveG85]

I have just re-read the judgment shared by Tim above on the Asset of Community Value listing. The reason that the Windmill is empty and becoming an increasing eye sore is because of the Asset of Community Value listing. I can only conclude that the people who obtained and continue to support this listing don't suffer the misfortune of having to walk past the Windmill twice daily as I do

[_HB]

Quite a few of them do, Steve. I wonder what goes through their mind when they pass it? The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Or something.

[Eagle]

I do symphasise with local residents that the view could be improved. For most of its life The Windmill was a well loved Pub . It got a bad name towards the end when standards slipped and as we know the landlords were determined to try to get planning permission to convert to yet another convenience store.

This was , and could be again , a nice community Pub . Perhaps the Landlords should lower the Price . Would be interested how much they purchased the building for ??

[leenewham]

Interesting plans were submitted for this which made the pub smaller, made it more attractive and added flats, which was an all round winner, surely.

What happened to them seems to be anyone guess. Anyone know, it looked like a good option.

[SteveG85]

There is a new sign up on the doors suggesting a property developer may have acquired the windmill. If you were hopelessly optimistic this could be taken as a sign that there might finally be some progress made soon(ish)...

[SteveG85]

The Windmill has now been standing empty for three and a half years, looking increasingly awful by the month. Since it closed and Sainsburys were stopped from replacing it by a well meaning campaign we've had some fantastic businesses open on this section of Kirkdale. Does anyone know whether the Asset of Community Value order is still impeding businesses opening on this site and if so whether it is possible to get it removed?

[SteveG85]

There has been another application to redevelop the site of the old Windmill Pub and The Sydenham Society has objected again. This is at least the third development The Society has objected to on this site since The Windmill closed over 3.5 years ago. First it was Sainsbury's, then it was the Antic Pubs application Lee mentioned and now it's a property developer.

This property is becoming more and more of an eye sore on a stretch of shops which is otherwise looking good. I'm sure I'm missing some but: 161, Mabel's, The Journey, The Fig & Pistachio, Sydenham Bikes, Dulwich Reclamation, Hibagon Sushi have all opened in the past few years and all have two things in common: they are relatively small commercial units and they have residential property above them. This seems like a formula that works. Over the same timeframe and on the same row of shops The Windmill and The Woodman have closed. They were both larger pubs.

The most recent application proposes to replace The Windmill with a smaller commercial unit below residential properties. Based on the other new openings on Kitkdale it seems pretty obvious that a newly built unit requiring no clean up before fit out would be filled. The Sydenham Society's approach to this property just completely baffles me. They seem to be objecting to any use of the property other than as a large pub, something which it seems quite obvious isn't going to happen. We've now waited 3.5 years for a pub operator to open a large pub on The Windmill site, how long do we have to wait before the Sydenham Society planning committee gives up on the idea?

[Pally]

I agree. Frustrating is an understatement! Why?