Woodman Public House: Planning Application change of use

[marymck]

A planning application has been submitted by Wooster and Stock, the new owners of The Woodman Public House, for ...

The change of use of the ground floor of the former Woodman Public House, 110 Kirkdale SE26 to an Estate Agency (Use Class A2) with storage in the basement, plus alterations to the elevations, including lower window cills and replacement glazing to existing ground floor arched windows and replacement entrance door on the Kirkdale elevation with a window to match, plus refurbishment and repainting of the exterior.

Details can be viewed online at ...

http://acolnet.lewisham.gov.uk/LEWIS-XS ... mkey=64512

The plans include major alterations to the exterior of the building, including changes to the windows and the relocating of the entrance door.

Comments may be submitted via e-mail to:

planning@lewisham.gov.uk

or by post to ...

Planning Service
London Borough of Lewisham
Laurence House
1 Catford Road
London SE6 4RU

Please include your name and address in your letter or e-mail, or your comments will not be taken into consideration.

You should also quote reference numbers DC/11/78469/X and DC/11/78470/X. (Bit of confusion on Lewisham's website as to which is the relevant number - both of these cover the alterations to the Woodman -so belt and braces & quote both maybe?)

I'm not sure of the closing date for comments, but I think we've got two weeks on this one. I'll post again when I know the definite closing date.

[Tim Lund]

Well, the target date for decision is 14 December 2011. My experience is that Lewisham officers are fairly flexible about accept representations.

[Dorian]

Another Estate Agent ? Thats just whats needed, eh !

What stance are the Sydenham Society taking on this application marymck ?

[marymck]

Hi Dorian:

Sorry for the delay in replying. I've been computer free for a couple of days ... oh the feeling of liberation!

To answer your question: Syd Soc's planning and conservation sub committee have discussed this application, they will be objecting. The letter of objection is a work in progress. The committee's concerns include but are not limited to the changes to the windows.

[marymck]

Well, the target date for decision is 14 December 2011. My experience is that Lewisham officers are fairly flexible about accept representations.

Sorry Tim, but recent experience shows that Planning announce decisions on the very day of final submissions and therefore we cannot expect any flexibility. However, as of last night no planning notice has yet appeared at the site ... the clock starts ticking as soon as a site notice appears and we are usually given 21 days. I will post when I know a definite date.

[Dorian]

Thanks Mary

Whilst I think the applicant is a good brand another Estate Agent is not what is needed for Sydenham to improve its vitality. Maybe Im wrong.

However, as of last night no planning notice has yet appeared at the site ... the clock starts ticking as soon as a site notice appears and we are usually given 21 days. I will post when I know a definite date.

Im not sure how much weight can be given to the erection of a site notice as they often mysteriously " fall off " soon after being put up ! I always understould that the " Clock started ticking " when the application was registered and statutory consultations are sent out, this may well be different for a change of use application ?

Im glad that you are objecting to it as I think it has a wider implication to future improvements generally, albeit I think the regrettable loss of a pub is a week argument. Some one recently posted a Pie graph of the commercial breakdown in Sydenham and it was hugely dominated with Estate Agents. Vitality and diversity are key.

[The The]

The Sydenham Society is objecting to a business that has invested money buying the site for commercial use, and I would expect their shop to be as fluffy and flowery as their property write ups so would think this will be an attractive addition to the corner. Would they prefer an empty shop like so many in the area or be more supportive to conversion to residential use whilst keeping the original windows intact? What would you like on the site?

[JulietP]

A pub, maybe?

[blue&whitewizard1991]

A pub, maybe?

I'm no expert but, I believe that Pub Cos often impose restrictive covenants on freehold sales of pubs to prevent the new vendor from actually allowing continued future usage as a pub. Its more than possible that the Woodman is subject to such a covenant in which case the prospect of seeing the building retained as a pub is highly unlikely (if not impossible). CAMRA are currently campaigning on this issue as part of its response to consultation on the localism bill.

Just to add to the mix - I didn't think a change of usage was required to convert a pub to a financial or professional services usage. Is is that Wooster and Stock have to apply for a change of usage because they want to alter the frontage???

[poppy]

I think Wooster Stock have been restoring the exterior too, is that right?

[marymck]

The Sydenham Society is objecting to a business that has invested money buying the site for commercial use, and I would expect their shop to be as fluffy and flowery as their property write ups so would think this will be an attractive addition to the corner. Would they prefer an empty shop like so many in the area or be more supportive to conversion to residential use whilst keeping the original windows intact? What would you like on the site?

The Sydenham Society have not yet finalised their letter of objection. As you can see from the application, the applicant has applied for Change of Use as well as rebranding (signage), external and external alterations. I suggest you have a look at the plans and if you approve of the drastic alterations to this historic building that you then write in support of the application.

Personally, speaking as a local resident, I very much regret the loss of the Woodman as a place of recreation: be it pub, cafe or restaurant and I think the whole area will be very much affected by the extreme branding of the building. These are my personal opinions.

[Labanised]

Hi, Marymck's comment resonates with me on the basis that if the Woodman is due to become another Estate Agent site, it just means I will have nothing to do with it as a local.

As a pub/ restaurant/ cafe, I can go in and use the place whereas I'll have absolutely no need to go in there if it's an Estate Agency (regardless of who they are).

Naturally, I'd rather the site not be derelict but personally, a business that can be used and/or serviced by locals seems 'right'. I guess my thinking leans towards a place that can generate initial and repeat custom from individuals for the betterment of the locale and (arguments about chicken shops aside) an Estate Agent falls into the 'one hit wonder' category.

[leenewham]

Having seen the plans I think they are rather good. I have no objections to the branding, it looks well considered (it's a shame they aren't proper visuals though).

I have concerns over the windows, but even this isn't as bad as it sounds.

The main issue is that it could have been a restaurant or a pub. But overall this is a good scheme for conversion from a pub to another use.

It's still prefer it to be a place to eat or drink.

It would be interesting to see what grounds objections are made on and if these objections will be made by our local Cllrs. With the mosaic, the objectors were told that design wasn't consideration for objection but heath and safety is. So as long Wooster and Stock screw the signs to the walls properly I don't how anyone can properly object!

[simon]

I should imagine that Wooster Stock will vacate their current office should they get permission to convert the Woodman so the net number of estate agent's offices will stay the same.
Like many pubs over the last few years the Woodman has failed to be viable under a few different managments and I doubt that a pub will pay its way in current conditions.

[Tim Lund]

It would be interesting to see what grounds objections are made on and if these objections will be made by our local Cllrs. With the mosaic, the objectors were told that design wasn't consideration for objection but heath and safety is. So as long Wooster and Stock screw the signs to the walls properly I don't how anyone can properly object!

Not sure that this makes a difference, but this is in Forest Hill ward

[marymck]

Planning notices have now appeared outside the Woodman. They give the closing date for comments as 10th November. Obviously, I am requesting an extension due to the extreme tardiness in displaying the notices. Pending further information though: comments should be made to Planning prior to 10th November.

Please remember: only comments to Planning will be taken into account. Not comments on this site.

[marymck]

Having seen the plans I think they are rather good. I have no objections to the branding, it looks well considered (it's a shame they aren't proper visuals though).

... So as long Wooster and Stock screw the signs to the walls properly I don't how anyone can properly object!

Lee

I'm afraid I completely disagree about the re-branding. The intended Wooster and Stock signage is in my opinion far, far too dominant, especially in a building in such a prominent position. I'm also unsure from the planning applications what colours will be used on the walls.

The Woodman is in my opinion a landmark building both historically and today. True it has been badly painted over the years but, as the removal of paint from some of the glazed tiles shows, this is just cosmetic.

Steve Grindlay tells me that the main cottage part of the building "dates from the 1830s and was known as The Woodman by 1838; the first landlord was a timber merchant who built rustic garden furniture on the site where Costcutters now is. Presumably he named the pub after his main occupation. In about 1858 the pub was extended at the front, parts were rebuilt and the present more imposing façade added to the front and sides. As far as I can make out it had been little changed since that time although there have been some alterations to the Halifax Street side."

In my opinion, the name The Woodman is important to this part of Sydenham. Indeed, London transport use "Sydenham/The Woodman" as the ID for buses stopping on both sides of the street. Wooster and Stock intend to lose all reference to the Woodman in their signage and obliterate the memory that this was ever a pub ... in my opinion.

[The Sydenham Society]

An extension has been granted: Steve Issacson (Planning Officer in this Case) will accept comments that reach him by 18th November at the latest.

[Annie]

[quote="The Sydenham Society"]An extension has been granted: Steve Issacson (Planning Officer in this Case) will accept comments that reach him by 18th November at the latest.[/q


Thank you for the info,
I have sent an Email to Lewisham, asking that the new owners should at least keep the original name of the pub on the front of the building,
the proposed change of use is better than completely knocking it down and building flats or something terrible.

[The Sydenham Society]

the proposed change of use is better than completely knocking it down and building flats or something terrible

Highly unlikely that permission would be granted to demolish The Woodman. It's a historic building, originally a small cottage with the outer walls of knapped flint. At least one of these original flint walls can still be seen on The Woodman. The only other building remaining in Sydenham with this type of walls is, as far as we know, the Sydenham Park Hall whose flint walls have recently been rendered over.

So planning applications really ought to be judged on their own merits, rather than on the fact that somebody may have put in an even worse plan.

Wooster and Stock are also proposing to increase the number of flats above The Woodman.