Going over old ground - The Hound that is Grey

[southernmoose]

It's so frustrating isn't it! Good work Mr_Sheen. Am wondering if trying a daily phone call might be more effective, as it's easy to ignore an email but not so easy to ignore a call?

Does anyone know what the Sydenham Society's perspective on this is, and if they're taking any action to try and move things along?

[JulietP]

I've started emailing too. Can't hurt...

[Mr_Sheen]

I'll probably get nowhere and end up on a harassment charge!

[gillyjp]

This , rather long subject , has devoloped into pubs of Sydenham and around.

Probably Dolphin best pub in SE26. Dulwich Woodhouse not as good since 1) Youngs Beer brewed by Well's in Bedford , miss the Wandle Water , Ouse not the same. 2 ) Since they upmarketed the establishment about 5 or so years ago. Seems only really interested in the posh eating trade. If you just go for a drink not made very welcome. Used to be good in 70's etc.
Best ever pub in my experience was The Bricklayers Arms up to about 82 or so. Best period was middle 70's . What atmosphere. All ages .

Dulwich Woodhouse is, IMHO, far and away the best pub with an SE26 postcode. Took a time to get used to the new style but I think they have taken constructive criticism, listened to what the locals want, and tailored the service to the demands of their clientele. It's a great summer pub - and on a glorious summer early evening, there's nowhere else I'd rather be in South East London. We had a lovely Mediterranean platter on Sunday, served in the garden by a charming young chap, along with drinks. No pressure to buy 'posh nosh' or any other course. Well worth the climb up Wells Park Road!

[Eagle]

Gilly . You are probably right , though only just in SE26.

Personally I think too much of an expensive food pub , rather than a real ale pub.

Up to 10 years or so ago renown for well kept Youngs Beers.

[Andwar]

There are a number of things I can add to this:

1: Small pubs do work and work well, last weekend I was in Birmingham and visited http://www.thewellingtonrealale.co.uk/, it is a small pub and probably smaller than the Greyhound will be. It is always busy, they don't serve food but you are welcome to bring your own as they provide the plates and cutlery.

2: I posted earlier on this topic about making it a community owned pub might in the guise of http://www.ivyhousenunhead.com/ in Nunhead. What are the members views on this?

3: Is there a chance of getting the local press involved and somehow via this medium put Purlake under pressure.

[Eagle]

Andwar
You sound a well meaning gentleman.

You will note from the hundreds of previous posts that people have tried putting pressure on Purelake , so far with zero success.

What do you suggest that has not been tried ?

It is possible a small pub without food could survive but not easy. We do not know for instance the rates , rent etc that will be charged to the establishment , if indeed it is ever finished.

I do wish you the best of luck.

[Nigel]

I think we have not really tried everything . There are now several of us writing to Purelake asking for estimations as to when they will complete the work .
I have now written to all of the partners listed on their websites and once I have given them a chance to respond I will post their response or lack of, on the hoarding outside the Greyhound as I said a while ago.
I am also thinking of a couple of flyers with Purelake's email and phone number with a kind of " Phone this number to find out when we will stop defacing your high street" .

I have no logical reason to think that this will work in itself but if I can be a minor irritant and help encourage others to start bombarding Purelake then that works for me .

We are certainly not going to scare them with our (admittedly very agreeable ) discussions about favourite hostelries - no suggestion that I know better than, or even as well as, anyone else but that's what I am doing .

A very good evening
Nigel

[Columbus]

Andwar
I agree with you on 1: a small pub is definitely viable, the key is just the rent being sufficiently low. As an extreme (clearly not going to happen) if there was no rent you could clearly get enough revenue to cover staff, rates and other costs to make a reasonable amount of money. Given what Purelake have done in some nicer universe they would take up their moral responsibility to charge rent at as low a rate as it takes for the business to be viable.

2 - would be amazing.

Nigel (and others) - good work keep up the pressure. Like the idea of publicly posting the responses at the Greyhound.

[Tim Lund]

How about everyone on this thread who wants to make progress on The Greyhound attend tomorrow's meeting to celebrate 1 year of SEE3? 7.30pm at the Horniman.

We need your input, ideas, feedback and most of all your enthusiasm. We want to celebrate the last year, but more importantly, we need plan for the next year and we'd like your help to do that.

Together we have achieved a lot in our first year of SEE3: Pop Up shops, Jack and Jill Community Hubs, Christmas Markets, Food Markets, Art & Craft Markets, Artists in Residence (Co.Futures), Knowledge Banking, Street Art, Club & Grub nights, Fashion Weeks, Shutter Art, Supper Clubs, Theatre Performances and more…
Forest Hill, Kirkdale and Sydenham have all seen new venues, new activities and new opportunities.

We need your help to plan for the next year. Your feedback and opinions matter, so come along on Wednesday 21st August at 7.30pm to the Horniman Museum to find out more about the success of our first year and how you can be involved in taking this forward.

This is your chance to Join In – your opportunity to Love Your High Street!

Join the Town Team
Test your business with a market stall
Volunteer and learn new skills
Shape your high street

I am sure there will be representatives of SydSoc there as well, who may be able to answer questions.

[blakewho]

I've mentioned it before but anyone who thinks a small pub could not survive on the Greyhound site should really look at The Harp in Covent Garden. It's considerably smaller than the new Greyhound would be and I very much doubt that rents and other charges are lower in Covent Garden than at Cobbs Corner. It's a fabulous little pub and has won CAMRA's pub of the year award (nationally) twice in recent years.

http://www.harpcoventgarden.com/

[Nigel]

Last night I was listing Purelake's partners, from their website, in order to copy them in to my emails to Purelake when I noticed that the Greyhound has disappeared from their website .
It was there a week ago - complete with an artist impression of a completed pub but now its gone.
This could mean that they are noticing the interest being expressed in their rubbish behaviour or could just be that in refreshing their website, they were forced to demolish part of it because some of the HTML was structurally unsafe . Who knows , in them meantime this gives another interesting slant for my next lot of emails to Purelake's partners .
A very good afternoon
Nigel

[G-Man]

Tim - that's a great idea. Everyone who can should go to the meeting. This development is at the top of our high street and a gateway to shoppers and potential traders. I think the beginnings of a good high street start with good pubs and everything comes from that. I think these views need to be aired tonight.

I'm not very well at the moment so can't make it, so would appreciate if these views were made and also if someone could let us know how things go on this thread tomorrow.

Thanks in advance.

G-man

[admin]

Last night I was listing Purelake's partners, from their website, in order to copy them in to my emails to Purelake when I noticed that the Greyhound has disappeared from their website

Google suggests it may have been on this page - the contents of which are missing:
http://www.purelake.co.uk/projects.php? ... ject_id=62

I was hoping to find it in the Google cache system - but it isn't working for me - I just get a blank black page. YMMV
(To get to Google cache - do an ordinary google search then click on the green downarrow on the URL. It should then show what it found on the date given)

Admin

[admin]

I was right - the page in the link above was The Greyhound.

But Purelake cannot so simply delete inconvenient history. I found a copy on the WayBackMachine. Enjoy the May 22nd edition: http://web.archive.org/web/201308140350 ... ject_id=62

Admin

[Nigel]

Admin
You are an interweb genius sir.
I will use this content for my flyers - possibly with a "Spot the Gastropub" competition .
I think it is an attempt to airbrush the Greyhound out of the picture but they didn't reckon on your considerable knowledge .
A very good evening
Nigel

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[Tim Lund]

Tim - that's a great idea. Everyone who can should go to the meeting. This development is at the top of our high street and a gateway to shoppers and potential traders. I think the beginnings of a good high street start with good pubs and everything comes from that. I think these views need to be aired tonight.

I'm not very well at the moment so can't make it, so would appreciate if these views were made and also if someone could let us know how things go on this thread tomorrow.

Thanks in advance.

G-man

Sorry G-Man - only recently back from work, and force majeure suggests I should not attend. She's right - and I wouldn't be the best person to air the matter. Hope someone does though, and report back.

[biscuitman1978]

After several requests I received an update from officers at Lewisham Council this afternoon. This is the position (based on the advice from officers and my own knowledge/additional research):

1. A 'deed of variation' (to the legal agreement attached to the original permission granted in May 2010) must be completed before the new planning permission to allow rebuilding of the pub can be formally issued. That deed of variation is currently at 'an advanced stage' with the Council's legal department.

Once the permission is formally issued Purelake will be permitted to get back on site to remove the mezzanine floor they built without permission.

2. Before further work can be done Purelake will need to get some detailed matters approved by officers at the Council. To use the planning-speak they need to 'discharge the conditions' imposed on the permission.

(a) To date, the Council has received applications to discharge two of the conditions, but the Council failed to deal with those applications in the target time period. Purelake have appealed to the Planning Inspectorate, which means the discharge of the conditions will be put in the hands of an independent inspector. His/her decision is expected in mid-October.

(b) No applications have been received from Purelake to discharge the remaining conditions. Officers assure me that once the applications are received they will 'seek to issue a determination as quickly as possible, depending upon the level of detail submitted'.

[perryman]

thanks biscuitman1978.

What we all want is for Purelake to discharge their responsibilities and complete the duties originally imposed.

I think I am right in thinking 'discharging the conditions' means quite the reverse and the building conditions Purelake want discharged are the ones they no longer wish to comply with.

I cannot understand why Lewisham planning office left these applications to time-out, rather than just refusing them, and telling Purelake to get on with it.

[biscuitman1978]

I think I am right in thinking 'discharging the conditions' means quite the reverse and the building conditions Purelake want discharged are the ones they no longer wish to comply with.

I'm pleased to say that you're wrong! Discharging the conditions simply means that specified things need to be done or certain information provided before work can start (or by another specified time). To my knowledge Purelake aren't seeking to vary or remove any of the conditions.

For what it's worth (and some of you may want to skip this bit!), I understand that the following conditions will need to be discharged before any work (other than removing the mezzanine) starts (though I can't be sure until the new permission is formally issued and I can look at the decision notice):

Submit and secure the Council's approval in writing of:
- Detailed plans at a scale of 1:20 showing elevation and section drawings and 1:5 plans of all new external joinery details including windows, doors, screens and balcony railings
- Details of elevations and sections of a scale no less than 1:20 of the proposed bay to the west elevation
- A schedule of all salvaged external windows and doors from the former Greyhound building indicating which doors and windows will be re-used or replaced
- Drawings of a scale no less than 1:5 of the eaves detail
- Samples of roof tiles to be used on the building
- A sample brick panel of the salvaged brick used to the side wall showing a ‘cleaned’ brick with mortar and pointing
- Plans of a scale no less than 1:10 of the projecting sign to the rear of the building
- A Design Stage Certificate for the building (prepared by a Building Research Establishment qualified assessor) to demonstrate that the building achieves a minimum BREEAM Rating of ‘Excellent’

So, a fair bit to do before work can start. But none of these conditions can be discharged until the new permission is formally issued (which would explain the lack of applications to date). Formal issue of the new permission is subject to completion of a deed of variation to the legal agreement imposed on the previous permission in May 2010. That deed of variation is in the hands of the Council's legal team. As I noted in my previous post, planning officers tell me that it is 'at an advanced stage', but I have nevertheless emailed the Head of Law at Lewisham Council seeking an update on progress. I will report back when I hear from her...

I cannot understand why Lewisham planning office left these applications to time-out, rather than just refusing them, and telling Purelake to get on with it.

Nor me. For what it's worth, the appeals relate to the discharge of conditions imposed on the previous permission back in May 2010. Presumably (though I don't know for sure as I don't have access to all the documentation) these conditions need to be discharged in addition to the conditions on the new permission.