Going over old ground - The Hound that is Grey

Eagle · Post by **Eagle** » 15 Sep 2013 15:17

Someone suggested the space be used as a parking lot for Sainsbury.

NO NO NO NO NO NOT under any circumstances. Pedestrian shoppers only.

Robin Orton · Post by **Robin Orton** » 15 Sep 2013 19:09

Eagle wrote: NO NO NO NO NO NOT under any circumstances.

More evidence that Eagle is channelling Lady Thatcher.

I am not surprised to note that my recent 'good advice on arguing' in the Town Pub - 'Seldom affirm, never deny, always distinguish' - has fallen on deaf ears.

marymck · Post by **marymck** » 15 Sep 2013 19:35

We're a bit more Dominic Behan than Thomas Aquinas in this pub Robin."Never drunk, but seldom sober".

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

perryman · Post by **perryman** » 16 Sep 2013 13:01

simono wrote:... The only hold the Council had in this matter, that the flats could not be occupied until the pub was refurbished, was surrendered for very good reason as was explained at the Sydenham Assembly....

Hi - what was this very good reason, because if the council did surrender such a hold,
it seems to me to have been a very bad mistake.
The refurbishment of the pub is now only tied to a small retail unit.

marymck · Post by **marymck** » 16 Sep 2013 19:13

perryman wrote:
simono wrote:... The only hold the Council had in this matter, that the flats could not be occupied until the pub was refurbished, was surrendered for very good reason as was explained at the Sydenham Assembly....
Hi - what was this very good reason, because if the council did surrender such a hold,
it seems to me to have been a very bad mistake.
The refurbishment of the pub is now only tied to a small retail unit.

I agree, a very bad and a very silly mistake. I believe it was because people were waiting to move in. Allegedly some had handed in their notice on previous properties.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

mosy · Post by **mosy** » 17 Sep 2013 15:35

I came away from the Sydenham Assembly thinking (according to what was said) that the council was between a rock and a hard place now trying to recover as best as possible a position that they'd not expected to be in following the illegal move by Purelake. Whether they, the council, should have been more vigilant given earlier instances mentioned about Purelake's, er, behaviour, is a different question and too late now of course to rake over those ashes. Let's hope a Phoenix rises from the ashes. Or a Greyhound.

perryman · Post by **perryman** » 18 Sep 2013 20:14

If the council has made a mistake, then it seems reasonable that they try to rectify it.

Given that the Greyhound is a place of local historical interest, why can't the council make a compulsory purchase of the site and the tied retail unit? Then they can contract the work out and sell the pub/unit ASAP.

If the council make a loss on the transactions, then it is up to their legal department to decide whether it is worth pursuing Purelake for the difference. Could this work?

biscuitman1978 · Post by **biscuitman1978** » 4 Oct 2013 11:33

biscuitman1978 wrote:I've referred in previous posts to the need for the completion of a 'deed of variation' to the legal agreement attached to the 2010 permission.

Once this is done the new planning permission for rebuilding of the Greyhound can be formally issued and:
- Purelake will be able to return to site to remove the mezzanine floor
- Purelake will be able to start discharging the conditions attached to the new permission (mainly agreeing the details of the design with the Council), which they need to do before they can start rebuilding

I've been advised today by the Head of Law at Lewisham Council that the Council sent the deed of variation to Purelake's solicitor last week and that she hopes to hear from them 'shortly'.

A quick update: the draft deed of variation is still being reviewed by Purelake. They have yet to advise the Council whether they will seek any changes. In other words, the ball is firmly in Purelake's court at the moment. The lawyer at the Council dealing with the matter has told me that she will chase them again.

Steveofsyd · Post by **Steveofsyd** » 22 Oct 2013 22:01

It's been 4 weeks. Any news on the Greyhound?
What's happening with the retail spaces...do we have any idea of any takers yet?

Does anyone have any idea as it's all gone rather silent.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

biscuitman1978 · Post by **biscuitman1978** » 22 Oct 2013 22:19

Steveofsyd wrote:It's been 4 weeks. Any news on the Greyhound?
What's happening with the retail spaces...do we have any idea of any takers yet?

Does anyone have any idea as it's all gone rather silent.

The draft deed of variation is still with Purelake's solicitor. Until it is signed no work can take place on the Greyhound. Until the rebuilding of the Greyhound is complete no one can take the retail space.

Various people (me included) are reminding the Council's solicitor to chase Purelake's solicitor and, with that prompt, they are doing so. Others are liaising with Purelake's planning consultants and asking them to chase Purelake's solicitors. They are doing so.

As for future occupiers of the space, as far as I know Sainsbury's still want to take one of the units.

Nigel · Post by **Nigel** » 22 Oct 2013 22:26

Biscuitman
Thanks for the update - I do wonder who else will be interested in the retail units . Do you know if they will have to be retail or could they be cafés or bars ?
A very good evening
Nigel

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

biscuitman1978 · Post by **biscuitman1978** » 22 Oct 2013 22:46

Nigel wrote:Biscuitman
Thanks for the update - I do wonder who else will be interested in the retail units . Do you know if they will have to be retail or could they be cafés or bars ?
A very good evening
Nigel

The original planning permission allows for the retail units to be occupied by:
- A1 uses - shops
- A3 uses - restaurants/cafes
- A4 uses - pubs/bars

The Greyhound itself will only be permitted to be used for A3 or A4 uses.

parker · Post by **parker** » 23 Oct 2013 23:44

I can't see why Sainsbury's would want the retail unit behind the pub as opposed to the double fronted one opposite the DIY shop... I wonder what that's about...

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Steveofsyd · Post by **Steveofsyd** » 24 Oct 2013 20:40

Unfortunately, I doubt that we'll get any cafés behind the pub either as it blocks the light. If it wasn't there ( yes we've had the pros and cons so don't want to start again) , we might have had a series of cafés with tables out in the square....more of a piazza.
If the pub is rebuilt, I hope it has tables outside and is the type of business that will attract some daytime trade otherwise it will just make the centre of the square dead space.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

leenewham · Post by **leenewham** » 24 Oct 2013 22:31

When we had plans for two squares the empty units next to them ended up being a funeral parlour and an estate agents. Unless there is tighter control, and our high streets are managed as to what businesses go where, you can't controlled what goes in which unit. The pub, in every visual, has outside seating.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Steveofsyd · Post by **Steveofsyd** » 27 Oct 2013 19:46

I hope whatever they do adds some vibrancy to the "town entrance"
I just think it's all rather cramped behind and will end up like a little no go area in the evening. Hope I'm wrong though as I will take no satisfaction if any plans fail.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

leenewham · Post by **leenewham** » 27 Oct 2013 20:22

The no area will be where sainsburys is and a large mural. It's not nice at the moment, but it will change.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

G-Man · Post by **G-Man** » 17 Nov 2013 12:01

Any further news on this? I was just talking to someone who's just moved back to the area and was saying how desperately Sydenham needs another nice pub to eat and drink in, and some more restaurants. Or our local night time economy will forever be taken by Palace or Forest Hill.

G-Man

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

biscuitman1978 · Post by **biscuitman1978** » 17 Nov 2013 16:30

G-Man wrote:Any further news on this? I was just talking to someone who's just moved back to the area and was saying how desperately Sydenham needs another nice pub to eat and drink in, and some more restaurants. Or our local night time economy will forever be taken by Palace or Forest Hill.

G-Man

A deed of variation to the legal agreement attached to the original planning permission needs to be signed before any further work can take place. The draft deed of variation is with Purelake and remains unsigned.

Sydenham ward councillors and I frequently ask the Council's legal team to put pressure on Purelake's solicitor to move this forward, but the Council's legal team doesn't appear to view this as a high priority.

I believe that ward councillors have now asked the Mayor and Deputy Mayor (who is responsible for planning) to intervene. I have made the same request of the Deputy Mayor and I await a response.

Meanwhile, a decision is still awaited on the planning appeals which relate to the Greyhound. The target date for a decision was mid-October, but clearly we are now a month beyond that date. There's not much we can do on that front other than wait.

Eagle · Post by **Eagle** » 17 Nov 2013 17:57

Oh what a sorry saga this is.

I think locals what action now. Either a new pub open , or pulled down.
The current is a blight on the area.

Sydenham Town Forum

The Community Voice for London SE26 since 2004