Town centre restaurant under planners' microscope after admitting ten breaches of planning permission

Essex County Standard: Town centre restaurant under planners' microscope after admitting ten breaches of planning permission Town centre restaurant under planners' microscope after admitting ten breaches of planning permission

A TOWN centre restaurant which opened with aplomb last year is now under the planners’ microscope.

The Stockwell, in West Stockwell Street, Colchester, opened after a £1million refurb of a Grade I-listed building, which transformed it from Colchester’s oldest pub to a family restaurant with real ale.

But after less than a year, Colchester Council planners have outlined ten breaches of planning consent.

The breaches, which include extractor fan sounds and odour problems from the kitchen, have been admitted by the restaurant. 

FOR THE FULL STORY, READ TODAY'S GAZETTE

Comments (30)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

1:37pm Mon 7 Apr 14

rhetoric says...

That's a pity - the neighbours who presumably suffer from these breaches will have to put up with it for some time before anything is ever done, and probably have suffered enough already.
.
Interested to see posts from those who have eaten here and enjoyed their meal and the ambience.
That's a pity - the neighbours who presumably suffer from these breaches will have to put up with it for some time before anything is ever done, and probably have suffered enough already. . Interested to see posts from those who have eaten here and enjoyed their meal and the ambience. rhetoric
  • Score: 1

1:53pm Mon 7 Apr 14

DailyGazette says...

Some of the flats that are allowed to be built in our historic town are a breach of common sense!!
Some of the flats that are allowed to be built in our historic town are a breach of common sense!! DailyGazette
  • Score: 14

2:28pm Mon 7 Apr 14

Biggus Davus says...

Since there's been a hostelry in this site for hundreds of years I presume they're more likely to be technical breaches to so with extractor heights etc rather than general noise complaints, that'd be like moving next to an airport then complaining about all the planes.....
Since there's been a hostelry in this site for hundreds of years I presume they're more likely to be technical breaches to so with extractor heights etc rather than general noise complaints, that'd be like moving next to an airport then complaining about all the planes..... Biggus Davus
  • Score: 8

2:38pm Mon 7 Apr 14

HARRY438 says...

£1million laid out -now its time to get some of that back.Should've bought the places next door?
£1million laid out -now its time to get some of that back.Should've bought the places next door? HARRY438
  • Score: 3

3:18pm Mon 7 Apr 14

Say It As It Is OK? says...

Tend to agree that planning conditions should always be properly addressed but at the same time I have to laugh because Colchester Council has a differing view when it comes to their own planning applications. In the case of the football stadium, they ignored previous conditions on the development and went ahead anyway making the rules up as they went along.
Tend to agree that planning conditions should always be properly addressed but at the same time I have to laugh because Colchester Council has a differing view when it comes to their own planning applications. In the case of the football stadium, they ignored previous conditions on the development and went ahead anyway making the rules up as they went along. Say It As It Is OK?
  • Score: 14

3:58pm Mon 7 Apr 14

sandgronun64 says...

Biggus Davus wrote:
Since there's been a hostelry in this site for hundreds of years I presume they're more likely to be technical breaches to so with extractor heights etc rather than general noise complaints, that'd be like moving next to an airport then complaining about all the planes.....
B.D.
With all respect, I suggest that perhaps you had better go online and see what the breaches actually are before posting about this. The issues are numerous and concern the developer not having followed the permission, and exceeding the limits originally set.

At a Licensing Committee meeting in early October 2013, the Stockwell received an unprecedented number of objections when an application was made to extend their opening hours. Prior to this, the (former) Stockwell Arms had NEVER received a single representation against its licence.

None of the neighbours has (nor have they ever) complained about living next to or near a pub. All the neighbours initially welcomed the restoration of what had been a much valued (and loved) community asset. Complaints only started when the owner put in plans that effectively doubled its size. It is no longer a pub. It is no longer pivotal to the surrounding community. I only wish it were still a pub. Instead we have a sort of hybrid entity that is (more often than not) largely bereft of customers.

If you want to get your facts straight, go to the council's planning pages and read about it first-hand - it beats guesswork every time.
[quote][p][bold]Biggus Davus[/bold] wrote: Since there's been a hostelry in this site for hundreds of years I presume they're more likely to be technical breaches to so with extractor heights etc rather than general noise complaints, that'd be like moving next to an airport then complaining about all the planes.....[/p][/quote]B.D. With all respect, I suggest that perhaps you had better go online and see what the breaches actually are before posting about this. The issues are numerous and concern the developer not having followed the permission, and exceeding the limits originally set. At a Licensing Committee meeting in early October 2013, the Stockwell received an unprecedented number of objections when an application was made to extend their opening hours. Prior to this, the (former) Stockwell Arms had NEVER received a single representation against its licence. None of the neighbours has (nor have they ever) complained about living next to or near a pub. All the neighbours initially welcomed the restoration of what had been a much valued (and loved) community asset. Complaints only started when the owner put in plans that effectively doubled its size. It is no longer a pub. It is no longer pivotal to the surrounding community. I only wish it were still a pub. Instead we have a sort of hybrid entity that is (more often than not) largely bereft of customers. If you want to get your facts straight, go to the council's planning pages and read about it first-hand - it beats guesswork every time. sandgronun64
  • Score: 9

4:06pm Mon 7 Apr 14

sandgronun64 says...

HARRY438 wrote:
£1million laid out -now its time to get some of that back.Should've bought the places next door?
How could he buy the houses next door?

They are people's homes. If he had planned to buy these too, it would have cost him a whole lot more; money he probably doesn't have.

Granted, he should have worked with the community, but given that there have been representations made by over a dozen of the neighbours, (see the council’s planning website for these) should he have bought all these houses to attempt to ‘wipe-out’ all opposition?

Perhaps the developer bit of more than he could chew?
[quote][p][bold]HARRY438[/bold] wrote: £1million laid out -now its time to get some of that back.Should've bought the places next door?[/p][/quote]How could he buy the houses next door? They are people's homes. If he had planned to buy these too, it would have cost him a whole lot more; money he probably doesn't have. Granted, he should have worked with the community, but given that there have been representations made by over a dozen of the neighbours, (see the council’s planning website for these) should he have bought all these houses to attempt to ‘wipe-out’ all opposition? Perhaps the developer bit of more than he could chew? sandgronun64
  • Score: 1

4:49pm Mon 7 Apr 14

SeaFish says...

sandgronun64 wrote:
Biggus Davus wrote:
Since there's been a hostelry in this site for hundreds of years I presume they're more likely to be technical breaches to so with extractor heights etc rather than general noise complaints, that'd be like moving next to an airport then complaining about all the planes.....
B.D.
With all respect, I suggest that perhaps you had better go online and see what the breaches actually are before posting about this. The issues are numerous and concern the developer not having followed the permission, and exceeding the limits originally set.

At a Licensing Committee meeting in early October 2013, the Stockwell received an unprecedented number of objections when an application was made to extend their opening hours. Prior to this, the (former) Stockwell Arms had NEVER received a single representation against its licence.

None of the neighbours has (nor have they ever) complained about living next to or near a pub. All the neighbours initially welcomed the restoration of what had been a much valued (and loved) community asset. Complaints only started when the owner put in plans that effectively doubled its size. It is no longer a pub. It is no longer pivotal to the surrounding community. I only wish it were still a pub. Instead we have a sort of hybrid entity that is (more often than not) largely bereft of customers.

If you want to get your facts straight, go to the council's planning pages and read about it first-hand - it beats guesswork every time.
Tell you what, sandgrounun64, why don't we just get The Stockwell shut down and sell it to Sainsbury's Local, then we would really be able to appreciate the building's extensive restoration. Oh, but then you'll have the problem of the delivery lorries crashing into the buildings to moan about.
[quote][p][bold]sandgronun64[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Biggus Davus[/bold] wrote: Since there's been a hostelry in this site for hundreds of years I presume they're more likely to be technical breaches to so with extractor heights etc rather than general noise complaints, that'd be like moving next to an airport then complaining about all the planes.....[/p][/quote]B.D. With all respect, I suggest that perhaps you had better go online and see what the breaches actually are before posting about this. The issues are numerous and concern the developer not having followed the permission, and exceeding the limits originally set. At a Licensing Committee meeting in early October 2013, the Stockwell received an unprecedented number of objections when an application was made to extend their opening hours. Prior to this, the (former) Stockwell Arms had NEVER received a single representation against its licence. None of the neighbours has (nor have they ever) complained about living next to or near a pub. All the neighbours initially welcomed the restoration of what had been a much valued (and loved) community asset. Complaints only started when the owner put in plans that effectively doubled its size. It is no longer a pub. It is no longer pivotal to the surrounding community. I only wish it were still a pub. Instead we have a sort of hybrid entity that is (more often than not) largely bereft of customers. If you want to get your facts straight, go to the council's planning pages and read about it first-hand - it beats guesswork every time.[/p][/quote]Tell you what, sandgrounun64, why don't we just get The Stockwell shut down and sell it to Sainsbury's Local, then we would really be able to appreciate the building's extensive restoration. Oh, but then you'll have the problem of the delivery lorries crashing into the buildings to moan about. SeaFish
  • Score: 5

4:51pm Mon 7 Apr 14

HARRY438 says...

Everything gotta price ticket ....... in an ideal world the pub could've annexed the houses & created a hostelry?
Everything gotta price ticket ....... in an ideal world the pub could've annexed the houses & created a hostelry? HARRY438
  • Score: 1

5:54pm Mon 7 Apr 14

partyplanner says...

SeaFish wrote:
sandgronun64 wrote:
Biggus Davus wrote:
Since there's been a hostelry in this site for hundreds of years I presume they're more likely to be technical breaches to so with extractor heights etc rather than general noise complaints, that'd be like moving next to an airport then complaining about all the planes.....
B.D.
With all respect, I suggest that perhaps you had better go online and see what the breaches actually are before posting about this. The issues are numerous and concern the developer not having followed the permission, and exceeding the limits originally set.

At a Licensing Committee meeting in early October 2013, the Stockwell received an unprecedented number of objections when an application was made to extend their opening hours. Prior to this, the (former) Stockwell Arms had NEVER received a single representation against its licence.

None of the neighbours has (nor have they ever) complained about living next to or near a pub. All the neighbours initially welcomed the restoration of what had been a much valued (and loved) community asset. Complaints only started when the owner put in plans that effectively doubled its size. It is no longer a pub. It is no longer pivotal to the surrounding community. I only wish it were still a pub. Instead we have a sort of hybrid entity that is (more often than not) largely bereft of customers.

If you want to get your facts straight, go to the council's planning pages and read about it first-hand - it beats guesswork every time.
Tell you what, sandgrounun64, why don't we just get The Stockwell shut down and sell it to Sainsbury's Local, then we would really be able to appreciate the building's extensive restoration. Oh, but then you'll have the problem of the delivery lorries crashing into the buildings to moan about.
SeaFish, you are being ridiculous now. Why couldn't it just be like it was in the old days...full of interesting people and locals and without large extractor fans causing nuisance for those around the building. Bring back Brian Jerrome, we love you Brian.
[quote][p][bold]SeaFish[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sandgronun64[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Biggus Davus[/bold] wrote: Since there's been a hostelry in this site for hundreds of years I presume they're more likely to be technical breaches to so with extractor heights etc rather than general noise complaints, that'd be like moving next to an airport then complaining about all the planes.....[/p][/quote]B.D. With all respect, I suggest that perhaps you had better go online and see what the breaches actually are before posting about this. The issues are numerous and concern the developer not having followed the permission, and exceeding the limits originally set. At a Licensing Committee meeting in early October 2013, the Stockwell received an unprecedented number of objections when an application was made to extend their opening hours. Prior to this, the (former) Stockwell Arms had NEVER received a single representation against its licence. None of the neighbours has (nor have they ever) complained about living next to or near a pub. All the neighbours initially welcomed the restoration of what had been a much valued (and loved) community asset. Complaints only started when the owner put in plans that effectively doubled its size. It is no longer a pub. It is no longer pivotal to the surrounding community. I only wish it were still a pub. Instead we have a sort of hybrid entity that is (more often than not) largely bereft of customers. If you want to get your facts straight, go to the council's planning pages and read about it first-hand - it beats guesswork every time.[/p][/quote]Tell you what, sandgrounun64, why don't we just get The Stockwell shut down and sell it to Sainsbury's Local, then we would really be able to appreciate the building's extensive restoration. Oh, but then you'll have the problem of the delivery lorries crashing into the buildings to moan about.[/p][/quote]SeaFish, you are being ridiculous now. Why couldn't it just be like it was in the old days...full of interesting people and locals and without large extractor fans causing nuisance for those around the building. Bring back Brian Jerrome, we love you Brian. partyplanner
  • Score: 4

6:36pm Mon 7 Apr 14

sandgronun64 says...

HARRY438 wrote:
Everything gotta price ticket ....... in an ideal world the pub could've annexed the houses & created a hostelry?
Which houses? None in the area around the Stockwell are for sale. When you say annexe, do you mean in the way that Russia recently annexed the Crimea? Please explain as I cannot understand what you mean.
[quote][p][bold]HARRY438[/bold] wrote: Everything gotta price ticket ....... in an ideal world the pub could've annexed the houses & created a hostelry?[/p][/quote]Which houses? None in the area around the Stockwell are for sale. When you say annexe, do you mean in the way that Russia recently annexed the Crimea? Please explain as I cannot understand what you mean. sandgronun64
  • Score: 2

6:54pm Mon 7 Apr 14

sandgronun64 says...

SeaFish wrote:
sandgronun64 wrote:
Biggus Davus wrote:
Since there's been a hostelry in this site for hundreds of years I presume they're more likely to be technical breaches to so with extractor heights etc rather than general noise complaints, that'd be like moving next to an airport then complaining about all the planes.....
B.D.
With all respect, I suggest that perhaps you had better go online and see what the breaches actually are before posting about this. The issues are numerous and concern the developer not having followed the permission, and exceeding the limits originally set.

At a Licensing Committee meeting in early October 2013, the Stockwell received an unprecedented number of objections when an application was made to extend their opening hours. Prior to this, the (former) Stockwell Arms had NEVER received a single representation against its licence.

None of the neighbours has (nor have they ever) complained about living next to or near a pub. All the neighbours initially welcomed the restoration of what had been a much valued (and loved) community asset. Complaints only started when the owner put in plans that effectively doubled its size. It is no longer a pub. It is no longer pivotal to the surrounding community. I only wish it were still a pub. Instead we have a sort of hybrid entity that is (more often than not) largely bereft of customers.

If you want to get your facts straight, go to the council's planning pages and read about it first-hand - it beats guesswork every time.
Tell you what, sandgrounun64, why don't we just get The Stockwell shut down and sell it to Sainsbury's Local, then we would really be able to appreciate the building's extensive restoration. Oh, but then you'll have the problem of the delivery lorries crashing into the buildings to moan about.
I am sorry that YOU think it would be beneficial to get the establishment closed down.

I know for a fact that that is not what the local residents want; most just wish that it was finished.

From what I can see on line though, it is the owner’s intransigence in satisfying the planning conditions - as set out by the council at the time that permission was originally granted - that has drawn out this whole process.

If anything gets it closed down, it will simply be that it is empty for most of the time that it is open (now only five and a half days per week).

The local residents are not the ones refusing to comply with the council.

The local residents are not stopping customers from going there. The local residents however, cannot afford the (frankly astronomical) prices the establishment now charges.

Don’t blame the residents then, as it is a story about someone who has breached planning.

P.S. Totally agree with party planner – Brian Jerome … Legend!
[quote][p][bold]SeaFish[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sandgronun64[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Biggus Davus[/bold] wrote: Since there's been a hostelry in this site for hundreds of years I presume they're more likely to be technical breaches to so with extractor heights etc rather than general noise complaints, that'd be like moving next to an airport then complaining about all the planes.....[/p][/quote]B.D. With all respect, I suggest that perhaps you had better go online and see what the breaches actually are before posting about this. The issues are numerous and concern the developer not having followed the permission, and exceeding the limits originally set. At a Licensing Committee meeting in early October 2013, the Stockwell received an unprecedented number of objections when an application was made to extend their opening hours. Prior to this, the (former) Stockwell Arms had NEVER received a single representation against its licence. None of the neighbours has (nor have they ever) complained about living next to or near a pub. All the neighbours initially welcomed the restoration of what had been a much valued (and loved) community asset. Complaints only started when the owner put in plans that effectively doubled its size. It is no longer a pub. It is no longer pivotal to the surrounding community. I only wish it were still a pub. Instead we have a sort of hybrid entity that is (more often than not) largely bereft of customers. If you want to get your facts straight, go to the council's planning pages and read about it first-hand - it beats guesswork every time.[/p][/quote]Tell you what, sandgrounun64, why don't we just get The Stockwell shut down and sell it to Sainsbury's Local, then we would really be able to appreciate the building's extensive restoration. Oh, but then you'll have the problem of the delivery lorries crashing into the buildings to moan about.[/p][/quote]I am sorry that YOU think it would be beneficial to get the establishment closed down. I know for a fact that that is not what the local residents want; most just wish that it was finished. From what I can see on line though, it is the owner’s intransigence in satisfying the planning conditions - as set out by the council at the time that permission was originally granted - that has drawn out this whole process. If anything gets it closed down, it will simply be that it is empty for most of the time that it is open (now only five and a half days per week). The local residents are not the ones refusing to comply with the council. The local residents are not stopping customers from going there. The local residents however, cannot afford the (frankly astronomical) prices the establishment now charges. Don’t blame the residents then, as it is a story about someone who has breached planning. P.S. Totally agree with party planner – Brian Jerome … Legend! sandgronun64
  • Score: 5

11:17pm Mon 7 Apr 14

historyman22 says...

Seem to remember that originally there was to be a crusader replete with chain, mail, helmet etc.

Perhaps it is time for a rethink/rebrand?

Why not have a life-sized model of Brian Jerome in the bar grinning at customers upon their entry?

A true reflection on the historic ‘status’ of this former pub!
Seem to remember that originally there was to be a crusader replete with chain, mail, helmet etc. Perhaps it is time for a rethink/rebrand? Why not have a life-sized model of Brian Jerome in the bar grinning at customers upon their entry? A true reflection on the historic ‘status’ of this former pub! historyman22
  • Score: 6

10:31am Tue 8 Apr 14

Assimilation says...

The building has been renovated. How can doing the garden, re-instating railings that were previously there caused harm and is detrimental to the neighbouring properties?

Of course there is another way around the planning restrictions. Sell it to a developer who would then turn into flats, the planning department and CBC would then approve everything without question.
The building has been renovated. How can doing the garden, re-instating railings that were previously there caused harm and is detrimental to the neighbouring properties? Of course there is another way around the planning restrictions. Sell it to a developer who would then turn into flats, the planning department and CBC would then approve everything without question. Assimilation
  • Score: 0

10:44am Tue 8 Apr 14

Red Tape 2 says...

While I think what the owner has done to smarten up a piece of Colchester history is excellent I must admit I never understood the commercial sense in this venture - you need to sell an awful lot of meals/beer to make up £1m initial outlay for a restaurant/pub that's not even in the main town centre and has no car park.
While I think what the owner has done to smarten up a piece of Colchester history is excellent I must admit I never understood the commercial sense in this venture - you need to sell an awful lot of meals/beer to make up £1m initial outlay for a restaurant/pub that's not even in the main town centre and has no car park. Red Tape 2
  • Score: 3

2:38pm Tue 8 Apr 14

HARRY438 says...

Maybe they are raising the prices to compensate for the low footfall ?
Maybe they are raising the prices to compensate for the low footfall ? HARRY438
  • Score: 1

3:23pm Tue 8 Apr 14

historyman22 says...

HARRY438 wrote:
Maybe they are raising the prices to compensate for the low footfall ?
I see ... a cunning plan!

Make it even more exclusive.

If custom is sparse somewhere, then raise the prices and they'll flood in. Watertight in the middle of a decade that has (so far) squeezed family budgets.

If only Woolworths, Jessops, Blockbuster Video etc., etc., had adopted such a brilliant plan they might still be trading.
[quote][p][bold]HARRY438[/bold] wrote: Maybe they are raising the prices to compensate for the low footfall ?[/p][/quote]I see ... a cunning plan! Make it even more exclusive. If custom is sparse somewhere, then raise the prices and they'll flood in. Watertight in the middle of a decade that has (so far) squeezed family budgets. If only Woolworths, Jessops, Blockbuster Video etc., etc., had adopted such a brilliant plan they might still be trading. historyman22
  • Score: 5

3:38pm Tue 8 Apr 14

historyman22 says...

Assimilation wrote:
The building has been renovated. How can doing the garden, re-instating railings that were previously there caused harm and is detrimental to the neighbouring properties?

Of course there is another way around the planning restrictions. Sell it to a developer who would then turn into flats, the planning department and CBC would then approve everything without question.
The current owner has doubled the size of the building and the council let them do it. Why assume that those that develop living space are given any more lax treatment.

This developer was allowed substantial leeway to expand the size of building on the site yet still wants more. It is sadly the story of many commercial developments in Colchester and I am of the opinion that conditions imposed on ANY development should be adhered to by the developer, whether pub, shop, hotel, factory of house. What is the point in planning control if it does not do so - for everyone?

Colchester's real (as opposed to imaginary) heritage has suffered heavily at the hands of a planning department that frequently favours developers over the needs of townsfolk.

The rot needs to be stopped each and every time a developer tries to introduce a measure of 'planning creep' to overcome restrictions they should legally observe. If this developer follows the conditions as set out, there will be no problem for them, surely?
[quote][p][bold]Assimilation[/bold] wrote: The building has been renovated. How can doing the garden, re-instating railings that were previously there caused harm and is detrimental to the neighbouring properties? Of course there is another way around the planning restrictions. Sell it to a developer who would then turn into flats, the planning department and CBC would then approve everything without question.[/p][/quote]The current owner has doubled the size of the building and the council let them do it. Why assume that those that develop living space are given any more lax treatment. This developer was allowed substantial leeway to expand the size of building on the site yet still wants more. It is sadly the story of many commercial developments in Colchester and I am of the opinion that conditions imposed on ANY development should be adhered to by the developer, whether pub, shop, hotel, factory of house. What is the point in planning control if it does not do so - for everyone? Colchester's real (as opposed to imaginary) heritage has suffered heavily at the hands of a planning department that frequently favours developers over the needs of townsfolk. The rot needs to be stopped each and every time a developer tries to introduce a measure of 'planning creep' to overcome restrictions they should legally observe. If this developer follows the conditions as set out, there will be no problem for them, surely? historyman22
  • Score: 4

5:50pm Tue 8 Apr 14

partyplanner says...

I'm sure the Council will look at the conditions that have been broken and make the pub keep to their conditions they were given. If not there would be no need for a planning department.
I'm sure the Council will look at the conditions that have been broken and make the pub keep to their conditions they were given. If not there would be no need for a planning department. partyplanner
  • Score: 6

9:51am Wed 9 Apr 14

James.Harrington says...

I had a drink in there a few days ago and what a boon of a place to be in.
Lovely traditional old Colchester pub tat we should all be thank full for.
It is because this is a little company that colchester council has gone to town on them.
I had a drink in there a few days ago and what a boon of a place to be in. Lovely traditional old Colchester pub tat we should all be thank full for. It is because this is a little company that colchester council has gone to town on them. James.Harrington
  • Score: 3

10:00am Wed 9 Apr 14

historyman22 says...

James.Harrington wrote:
I had a drink in there a few days ago and what a boon of a place to be in.
Lovely traditional old Colchester pub tat we should all be thank full for.
It is because this is a little company that colchester council has gone to town on them.
"Lovely traditional old colchester pub tat ...(?)"

Wasn't that what it was full of when Brian Jerome was there?
[quote][p][bold]James.Harrington[/bold] wrote: I had a drink in there a few days ago and what a boon of a place to be in. Lovely traditional old Colchester pub tat we should all be thank full for. It is because this is a little company that colchester council has gone to town on them.[/p][/quote]"Lovely traditional old colchester pub tat ...(?)" Wasn't that what it was full of when Brian Jerome was there? historyman22
  • Score: -4

10:08am Wed 9 Apr 14

sandgronun64 says...

James.Harrington wrote:
I had a drink in there a few days ago and what a boon of a place to be in.
Lovely traditional old Colchester pub tat we should all be thank full for.
It is because this is a little company that colchester council has gone to town on them.
Thanks for clearing that up.

Here we all were thinking it was because he had breached his planning consent on over 10 counts that the council were finally taking him to task over this.

As for itbeing a traditional pub, all the advertising says it is a fine dining restaurant, with frequent press releases during the rennovations describing it as a "Former Pub."

It used to be a pub ... but now it is not.
[quote][p][bold]James.Harrington[/bold] wrote: I had a drink in there a few days ago and what a boon of a place to be in. Lovely traditional old Colchester pub tat we should all be thank full for. It is because this is a little company that colchester council has gone to town on them.[/p][/quote]Thanks for clearing that up. Here we all were thinking it was because he had breached his planning consent on over 10 counts that the council were finally taking him to task over this. As for itbeing a traditional pub, all the advertising says it is a fine dining restaurant, with frequent press releases during the rennovations describing it as a "Former Pub." It used to be a pub ... but now it is not. sandgronun64
  • Score: -3

10:14am Wed 9 Apr 14

partyplanner says...

James.Harrington wrote:
I had a drink in there a few days ago and what a boon of a place to be in.
Lovely traditional old Colchester pub tat we should all be thank full for.
It is because this is a little company that colchester council has gone to town on them.
You have no idea!!!! I'm sure Colchester Council would have not intervened has it not been for so many complaints. Brain Jerrome never had one complaint in his twenty year history there...tells you something - the council did not have to intervene when Brian was at the helm.
[quote][p][bold]James.Harrington[/bold] wrote: I had a drink in there a few days ago and what a boon of a place to be in. Lovely traditional old Colchester pub tat we should all be thank full for. It is because this is a little company that colchester council has gone to town on them.[/p][/quote]You have no idea!!!! I'm sure Colchester Council would have not intervened has it not been for so many complaints. Brain Jerrome never had one complaint in his twenty year history there...tells you something - the council did not have to intervene when Brian was at the helm. partyplanner
  • Score: -3

11:08pm Wed 9 Apr 14

A Very Private Gentleman says...

The council has not bothered to intervene properly to all the poor people living in Stanway that are covered in sand and dust night and day with the development going on down there why? 2 years now of endless drilling housing shaking. Damping down is a tractor with a brass tap on the back, with Boss Teflon stating dust and sand has to be in your hair and to impede your breath before it is classed as a contravention. The reason why nothing is done is ENV Health gets tipped off, before they go to slap wrists or get fed BS by the site Oppo. Or another reason is the 20 Million good ones, followed by about another 120 Million reasons in the offing. Who is going to take on a company with £Billion turnover? But they will turn over a little bloke with a couple of fans, in snobbo quarter, Oh my St Michael underwear stinks of burger & chips. Most of the houses near the boozer are paid for on the backs of us anyway. First you don't want cars driving down or parking there, now you don't want this and that form a bloke trying to make a crust. I hope the yobbos p**s on your door steps at night after they have had a good drink, you ungrateful lot what a bunch of moaning bullies.
The council has not bothered to intervene properly to all the poor people living in Stanway that are covered in sand and dust night and day with the development going on down there why? 2 years now of endless drilling housing shaking. Damping down is a tractor with a brass tap on the back, with Boss Teflon stating dust and sand has to be in your hair and to impede your breath before it is classed as a contravention. The reason why nothing is done is ENV Health gets tipped off, before they go to slap wrists or get fed BS by the site Oppo. Or another reason is the 20 Million good ones, followed by about another 120 Million reasons in the offing. Who is going to take on a company with £Billion turnover? But they will turn over a little bloke with a couple of fans, in snobbo quarter, Oh my St Michael underwear stinks of burger & chips. Most of the houses near the boozer are paid for on the backs of us anyway. First you don't want cars driving down or parking there, now you don't want this and that form a bloke trying to make a crust. I hope the yobbos p**s on your door steps at night after they have had a good drink, you ungrateful lot what a bunch of moaning bullies. A Very Private Gentleman
  • Score: 2

12:00am Thu 10 Apr 14

sandgronun64 says...

A Very Private Gentleman wrote:
The council has not bothered to intervene properly to all the poor people living in Stanway that are covered in sand and dust night and day with the development going on down there why? 2 years now of endless drilling housing shaking. Damping down is a tractor with a brass tap on the back, with Boss Teflon stating dust and sand has to be in your hair and to impede your breath before it is classed as a contravention. The reason why nothing is done is ENV Health gets tipped off, before they go to slap wrists or get fed BS by the site Oppo. Or another reason is the 20 Million good ones, followed by about another 120 Million reasons in the offing. Who is going to take on a company with £Billion turnover? But they will turn over a little bloke with a couple of fans, in snobbo quarter, Oh my St Michael underwear stinks of burger & chips. Most of the houses near the boozer are paid for on the backs of us anyway. First you don't want cars driving down or parking there, now you don't want this and that form a bloke trying to make a crust. I hope the yobbos p**s on your door steps at night after they have had a good drink, you ungrateful lot what a bunch of moaning bullies.
Whilst I truly hope that the situation in Stanway is resolved quickly, you appear to think that when locals make a stand against a bully, and an inept council that makes them 'snobby.'

If it is the problem that you say it is, then get organized and fight it. It is your fight.

This one, (it would seem) is not. Unless you haven't told us something that is?
[quote][p][bold]A Very Private Gentleman[/bold] wrote: The council has not bothered to intervene properly to all the poor people living in Stanway that are covered in sand and dust night and day with the development going on down there why? 2 years now of endless drilling housing shaking. Damping down is a tractor with a brass tap on the back, with Boss Teflon stating dust and sand has to be in your hair and to impede your breath before it is classed as a contravention. The reason why nothing is done is ENV Health gets tipped off, before they go to slap wrists or get fed BS by the site Oppo. Or another reason is the 20 Million good ones, followed by about another 120 Million reasons in the offing. Who is going to take on a company with £Billion turnover? But they will turn over a little bloke with a couple of fans, in snobbo quarter, Oh my St Michael underwear stinks of burger & chips. Most of the houses near the boozer are paid for on the backs of us anyway. First you don't want cars driving down or parking there, now you don't want this and that form a bloke trying to make a crust. I hope the yobbos p**s on your door steps at night after they have had a good drink, you ungrateful lot what a bunch of moaning bullies.[/p][/quote]Whilst I truly hope that the situation in Stanway is resolved quickly, you appear to think that when locals make a stand against a bully, and an inept council that makes them 'snobby.' If it is the problem that you say it is, then get organized and fight it. It is your fight. This one, (it would seem) is not. Unless you haven't told us something that is? sandgronun64
  • Score: 0

5:35pm Wed 16 Apr 14

daveintiptree says...

Just want to comment on all of these non Sens.

How dare of you in those time of crises, in the time that Job is hard to find. How dare of you you are looking and talking as arrogant as you do of someone that spend £1M to save a building that was due to collapse. A building that was rotten and unsafe. The oldest pub in town.
1349 is the date of the place.
Yes the man as extended the premises. A simple Pub will never on is own cover the cost of the investment.
Now its a pub at the front, have you been in it? I have many and many time. Prices for a drink is the same as everywhere no cheaper no more expensive. All that will say over-wise is a liar. Walk in it, it's run by A French manager that fight so hard to make you welcome and a team of local staff. See that is not expensive.
The food is really nice and unusual and really colchester Should be proud.
They brought to Colchester a trophy in one year only, Best newcomer restaurant. We should all be proud of a place like this that put colchester on the Essex map for catering.

Now breach of planing permission,
Lets see - I read it clearly you moan about a little bit of blue brick at the front of the railing.
OMG that is so terrible, come on its only a little color of bricks to make it look amazing and you moan about.
Window that is to small or place couple of inch to much on the right? a couple of inches a simple window if I read it well on an extension that is so so so terrible.
Are you really have your mind set up right. Yes it should have been readjusted but this doesn't require such attack. Did you look in the street how many people have change the glaze of there window and how its not original. Lets prosecute the whole street then.
now the sign inst conform as its transpire.
The place use to have 3 sign it only have one that doesn't obstruct the visual or anything.. But as it looks like you gonna go back to the old type that to me will look bigger.
finally the color of the painting isn't the right one and this has to be taken off and repainted.
Ok give you that one but is that make your life HELL.

Now all the over allegation by those people as been dismiss and they lost.
Leave this business trade they have if I'm correct 14 staff plus they bring food to this street they provide a light and a nice place to be. They don't do disco or arm.
They close at 11pm. So Stop you are just upset and want it shut. You haven't got your mind right on this.

I respect the owner and will and still come in this restaurant its affordable but not the "cheappy" that has wrong guest in. I feel secure looked after and Colchester people and resident should everyday thanks this man that not only save this PUB.
Bring it to life but by having a clean and successful business inevitably will push the value of the local house up.

Theses neighbors should be happy of this. Maybe she would have prefer the building collapsing in her garden.

Now My name is Dave and if you want I can give you my number to show you that I'm not the owner but a guest and a history lover that thanks the Pub and staff everyday for what they did.

Leave them alone or support them maybe try to call the French manager he is so easy to talk with and very nice accommodating man that I'm sure will help you a lot.
Just want to comment on all of these non Sens. How dare of you in those time of crises, in the time that Job is hard to find. How dare of you you are looking and talking as arrogant as you do of someone that spend £1M to save a building that was due to collapse. A building that was rotten and unsafe. The oldest pub in town. 1349 is the date of the place. Yes the man as extended the premises. A simple Pub will never on is own cover the cost of the investment. Now its a pub at the front, have you been in it? I have many and many time. Prices for a drink is the same as everywhere no cheaper no more expensive. All that will say over-wise is a liar. Walk in it, it's run by A French manager that fight so hard to make you welcome and a team of local staff. See that is not expensive. The food is really nice and unusual and really colchester Should be proud. They brought to Colchester a trophy in one year only, Best newcomer restaurant. We should all be proud of a place like this that put colchester on the Essex map for catering. Now breach of planing permission, Lets see - I read it clearly you moan about a little bit of blue brick at the front of the railing. OMG that is so terrible, come on its only a little color of bricks to make it look amazing and you moan about. Window that is to small or place couple of inch to much on the right? a couple of inches a simple window if I read it well on an extension that is so so so terrible. Are you really have your mind set up right. Yes it should have been readjusted but this doesn't require such attack. Did you look in the street how many people have change the glaze of there window and how its not original. Lets prosecute the whole street then. now the sign inst conform as its transpire. The place use to have 3 sign it only have one that doesn't obstruct the visual or anything.. But as it looks like you gonna go back to the old type that to me will look bigger. finally the color of the painting isn't the right one and this has to be taken off and repainted. Ok give you that one but is that make your life HELL. Now all the over allegation by those people as been dismiss and they lost. Leave this business trade they have if I'm correct 14 staff plus they bring food to this street they provide a light and a nice place to be. They don't do disco or arm. They close at 11pm. So Stop you are just upset and want it shut. You haven't got your mind right on this. I respect the owner and will and still come in this restaurant its affordable but not the "cheappy" that has wrong guest in. I feel secure looked after and Colchester people and resident should everyday thanks this man that not only save this PUB. Bring it to life but by having a clean and successful business inevitably will push the value of the local house up. Theses neighbors should be happy of this. Maybe she would have prefer the building collapsing in her garden. Now My name is Dave and if you want I can give you my number to show you that I'm not the owner but a guest and a history lover that thanks the Pub and staff everyday for what they did. Leave them alone or support them maybe try to call the French manager he is so easy to talk with and very nice accommodating man that I'm sure will help you a lot. daveintiptree
  • Score: 0

11:23pm Wed 16 Apr 14

Mick Lavelle says...

daveintiptree wrote:
Just want to comment on all of these non Sens.

How dare of you in those time of crises, in the time that Job is hard to find. How dare of you you are looking and talking as arrogant as you do of someone that spend £1M to save a building that was due to collapse. A building that was rotten and unsafe. The oldest pub in town.
1349 is the date of the place.
Yes the man as extended the premises. A simple Pub will never on is own cover the cost of the investment.
Now its a pub at the front, have you been in it? I have many and many time. Prices for a drink is the same as everywhere no cheaper no more expensive. All that will say over-wise is a liar. Walk in it, it's run by A French manager that fight so hard to make you welcome and a team of local staff. See that is not expensive.
The food is really nice and unusual and really colchester Should be proud.
They brought to Colchester a trophy in one year only, Best newcomer restaurant. We should all be proud of a place like this that put colchester on the Essex map for catering.

Now breach of planing permission,
Lets see - I read it clearly you moan about a little bit of blue brick at the front of the railing.
OMG that is so terrible, come on its only a little color of bricks to make it look amazing and you moan about.
Window that is to small or place couple of inch to much on the right? a couple of inches a simple window if I read it well on an extension that is so so so terrible.
Are you really have your mind set up right. Yes it should have been readjusted but this doesn't require such attack. Did you look in the street how many people have change the glaze of there window and how its not original. Lets prosecute the whole street then.
now the sign inst conform as its transpire.
The place use to have 3 sign it only have one that doesn't obstruct the visual or anything.. But as it looks like you gonna go back to the old type that to me will look bigger.
finally the color of the painting isn't the right one and this has to be taken off and repainted.
Ok give you that one but is that make your life HELL.

Now all the over allegation by those people as been dismiss and they lost.
Leave this business trade they have if I'm correct 14 staff plus they bring food to this street they provide a light and a nice place to be. They don't do disco or arm.
They close at 11pm. So Stop you are just upset and want it shut. You haven't got your mind right on this.

I respect the owner and will and still come in this restaurant its affordable but not the "cheappy" that has wrong guest in. I feel secure looked after and Colchester people and resident should everyday thanks this man that not only save this PUB.
Bring it to life but by having a clean and successful business inevitably will push the value of the local house up.

Theses neighbors should be happy of this. Maybe she would have prefer the building collapsing in her garden.

Now My name is Dave and if you want I can give you my number to show you that I'm not the owner but a guest and a history lover that thanks the Pub and staff everyday for what they did.

Leave them alone or support them maybe try to call the French manager he is so easy to talk with and very nice accommodating man that I'm sure will help you a lot.
Having now read this twice, I now regard you as being one of Tiptree’s most underrated and (as yet) undiscovered comedy talents.

Hats off to you daveintiptree. You gave me a bl*ody good laugh!

Please post again soon, or better still, contact a theatrical agent in London.

You could yet be one of the greats!

Superb!
LOL!
[quote][p][bold]daveintiptree[/bold] wrote: Just want to comment on all of these non Sens. How dare of you in those time of crises, in the time that Job is hard to find. How dare of you you are looking and talking as arrogant as you do of someone that spend £1M to save a building that was due to collapse. A building that was rotten and unsafe. The oldest pub in town. 1349 is the date of the place. Yes the man as extended the premises. A simple Pub will never on is own cover the cost of the investment. Now its a pub at the front, have you been in it? I have many and many time. Prices for a drink is the same as everywhere no cheaper no more expensive. All that will say over-wise is a liar. Walk in it, it's run by A French manager that fight so hard to make you welcome and a team of local staff. See that is not expensive. The food is really nice and unusual and really colchester Should be proud. They brought to Colchester a trophy in one year only, Best newcomer restaurant. We should all be proud of a place like this that put colchester on the Essex map for catering. Now breach of planing permission, Lets see - I read it clearly you moan about a little bit of blue brick at the front of the railing. OMG that is so terrible, come on its only a little color of bricks to make it look amazing and you moan about. Window that is to small or place couple of inch to much on the right? a couple of inches a simple window if I read it well on an extension that is so so so terrible. Are you really have your mind set up right. Yes it should have been readjusted but this doesn't require such attack. Did you look in the street how many people have change the glaze of there window and how its not original. Lets prosecute the whole street then. now the sign inst conform as its transpire. The place use to have 3 sign it only have one that doesn't obstruct the visual or anything.. But as it looks like you gonna go back to the old type that to me will look bigger. finally the color of the painting isn't the right one and this has to be taken off and repainted. Ok give you that one but is that make your life HELL. Now all the over allegation by those people as been dismiss and they lost. Leave this business trade they have if I'm correct 14 staff plus they bring food to this street they provide a light and a nice place to be. They don't do disco or arm. They close at 11pm. So Stop you are just upset and want it shut. You haven't got your mind right on this. I respect the owner and will and still come in this restaurant its affordable but not the "cheappy" that has wrong guest in. I feel secure looked after and Colchester people and resident should everyday thanks this man that not only save this PUB. Bring it to life but by having a clean and successful business inevitably will push the value of the local house up. Theses neighbors should be happy of this. Maybe she would have prefer the building collapsing in her garden. Now My name is Dave and if you want I can give you my number to show you that I'm not the owner but a guest and a history lover that thanks the Pub and staff everyday for what they did. Leave them alone or support them maybe try to call the French manager he is so easy to talk with and very nice accommodating man that I'm sure will help you a lot.[/p][/quote]Having now read this twice, I now regard you as being one of Tiptree’s most underrated and (as yet) undiscovered comedy talents. Hats off to you daveintiptree. You gave me a bl*ody good laugh! Please post again soon, or better still, contact a theatrical agent in London. You could yet be one of the greats! Superb! LOL! Mick Lavelle
  • Score: 2

1:48pm Thu 17 Apr 14

daveintiptree says...

@Mick Lavelle

Thank you for the offer, But my career is secured enough.
And I'm glad that you smile at it. I don't reject that you may have suffer of the building work and been upset about certain thing.
But what now, are you going to fight endlessly with them.
Go on just move on step by step things will get better and maybe if you go and talk to the chap. Maybe not the owner as you have a lot of hunger against. But go and talk to the people inside that make this place run.
I'm absolutely sure that they will look after you and try to help you too.

I never seen bad people and drunk guest or bad behaving patron at the Stockwell. Maybe as close neighbor you may say either wise but I'm sure if you try to contact them they will do the best to make your family life better.

At the end I respect your passion and really thumbs up you effort to have things done right if you believe that is either affect your own house or your citizen right.
But now what? the place is in here you have to live with it, try to make it work and live with them too.
Sometime it only need just a step and a handshake to change so much.
I talk on experience...

Hope you have a good Easter.
Regard
@Mick Lavelle Thank you for the offer, But my career is secured enough. And I'm glad that you smile at it. I don't reject that you may have suffer of the building work and been upset about certain thing. But what now, are you going to fight endlessly with them. Go on just move on step by step things will get better and maybe if you go and talk to the chap. Maybe not the owner as you have a lot of hunger against. But go and talk to the people inside that make this place run. I'm absolutely sure that they will look after you and try to help you too. I never seen bad people and drunk guest or bad behaving patron at the Stockwell. Maybe as close neighbor you may say either wise but I'm sure if you try to contact them they will do the best to make your family life better. At the end I respect your passion and really thumbs up you effort to have things done right if you believe that is either affect your own house or your citizen right. But now what? the place is in here you have to live with it, try to make it work and live with them too. Sometime it only need just a step and a handshake to change so much. I talk on experience... Hope you have a good Easter. Regard daveintiptree
  • Score: 0

1:02am Fri 18 Apr 14

Mick Lavelle says...

daveintiptree wrote:
@Mick Lavelle

Thank you for the offer, But my career is secured enough.
And I'm glad that you smile at it. I don't reject that you may have suffer of the building work and been upset about certain thing.
But what now, are you going to fight endlessly with them.
Go on just move on step by step things will get better and maybe if you go and talk to the chap. Maybe not the owner as you have a lot of hunger against. But go and talk to the people inside that make this place run.
I'm absolutely sure that they will look after you and try to help you too.

I never seen bad people and drunk guest or bad behaving patron at the Stockwell. Maybe as close neighbor you may say either wise but I'm sure if you try to contact them they will do the best to make your family life better.

At the end I respect your passion and really thumbs up you effort to have things done right if you believe that is either affect your own house or your citizen right.
But now what? the place is in here you have to live with it, try to make it work and live with them too.
Sometime it only need just a step and a handshake to change so much.
I talk on experience...

Hope you have a good Easter.
Regard
Daveintiptree (if that is ‘where’ you really are), this thread really should be concerned about (and therefore limited to) the breaches in planning that it refers to.

A central tenet of your comment seems to suggest that a ‘kiss and make up’ strategy would be the best solution for all parties concerned.

Can I be clear therefore here, that I have no problem with anyone now working in the Stockwell? They (the staff involved with the day-to-day running of the restaurant) are not responsible for the development of this site (having only commenced their involvement after the restaurant opened); nor did they exceed their lawful planning consent. Unfortunately - and as a direct consequence of this - the staff working therein, whether they be the ‘French manager’ or not, have no part to play in the planning farce that has unfolded over the last three years.

Perhaps then, it would be best if they (the restaurant staff) were not brought into it?

I am sure that you would agree that their job is to tend to the needs of customers?

To try and involve them in the matter of the ownership, overstepping their planning restrictions, would then (I am sure you would also agree), would also be unwise?

I tend to think that the issues surrounding planning matters affecting the development, would be best left to the council, owner and RESIDENTS of the immediate area.

In respect of the idea that the residents should talk to the restaurant’s manager though, I cannot help but think that it is just a pity that this newly launched venture does not have a live-in manager; one that carries sway with the owner(s). In its previous incarnation (the Stockwell Arms), there was always a management presence; one that was a genuine interface with the community. The manager (Landlord) had responsibility and sway as to what happened. The community therefore respected them and (of course) talked with them.

The current plan to have a completely ‘automated’ managerial system (i.e. no live-in presence) merely serves to alienate the premises from the community.

Please do not presume therefore that it is just a matter of neighbours resuming cordial relations. Given the lack of a residential presence on the newly developed site, the neighbouring properties have no ‘neighbourly relations.’ That (it is greatly regretted) died with the end of its being a residential establishment.
[quote][p][bold]daveintiptree[/bold] wrote: @Mick Lavelle Thank you for the offer, But my career is secured enough. And I'm glad that you smile at it. I don't reject that you may have suffer of the building work and been upset about certain thing. But what now, are you going to fight endlessly with them. Go on just move on step by step things will get better and maybe if you go and talk to the chap. Maybe not the owner as you have a lot of hunger against. But go and talk to the people inside that make this place run. I'm absolutely sure that they will look after you and try to help you too. I never seen bad people and drunk guest or bad behaving patron at the Stockwell. Maybe as close neighbor you may say either wise but I'm sure if you try to contact them they will do the best to make your family life better. At the end I respect your passion and really thumbs up you effort to have things done right if you believe that is either affect your own house or your citizen right. But now what? the place is in here you have to live with it, try to make it work and live with them too. Sometime it only need just a step and a handshake to change so much. I talk on experience... Hope you have a good Easter. Regard[/p][/quote]Daveintiptree (if that is ‘where’ you really are), this thread really should be concerned about (and therefore limited to) the breaches in planning that it refers to. A central tenet of your comment seems to suggest that a ‘kiss and make up’ strategy would be the best solution for all parties concerned. Can I be clear therefore here, that I have no problem with anyone now working in the Stockwell? They (the staff involved with the day-to-day running of the restaurant) are not responsible for the development of this site (having only commenced their involvement after the restaurant opened); nor did they exceed their lawful planning consent. Unfortunately - and as a direct consequence of this - the staff working therein, whether they be the ‘French manager’ or not, have no part to play in the planning farce that has unfolded over the last three years. Perhaps then, it would be best if they (the restaurant staff) were not brought into it? I am sure that you would agree that their job is to tend to the needs of customers? To try and involve them in the matter of the ownership, overstepping their planning restrictions, would then (I am sure you would also agree), would also be unwise? I tend to think that the issues surrounding planning matters affecting the development, would be best left to the council, owner and RESIDENTS of the immediate area. In respect of the idea that the residents should talk to the restaurant’s manager though, I cannot help but think that it is just a pity that this newly launched venture does not have a live-in manager; one that carries sway with the owner(s). In its previous incarnation (the Stockwell Arms), there was always a management presence; one that was a genuine interface with the community. The manager (Landlord) had responsibility and sway as to what happened. The community therefore respected them and (of course) talked with them. The current plan to have a completely ‘automated’ managerial system (i.e. no live-in presence) merely serves to alienate the premises from the community. Please do not presume therefore that it is just a matter of neighbours resuming cordial relations. Given the lack of a residential presence on the newly developed site, the neighbouring properties have no ‘neighbourly relations.’ That (it is greatly regretted) died with the end of its being a residential establishment. Mick Lavelle
  • Score: 2

1:14am Fri 18 Apr 14

Mick Lavelle says...

daveintiptree wrote:
@Mick Lavelle

Thank you for the offer, But my career is secured enough.
And I'm glad that you smile at it. I don't reject that you may have suffer of the building work and been upset about certain thing.
But what now, are you going to fight endlessly with them.
Go on just move on step by step things will get better and maybe if you go and talk to the chap. Maybe not the owner as you have a lot of hunger against. But go and talk to the people inside that make this place run.
I'm absolutely sure that they will look after you and try to help you too.

I never seen bad people and drunk guest or bad behaving patron at the Stockwell. Maybe as close neighbor you may say either wise but I'm sure if you try to contact them they will do the best to make your family life better.

At the end I respect your passion and really thumbs up you effort to have things done right if you believe that is either affect your own house or your citizen right.
But now what? the place is in here you have to live with it, try to make it work and live with them too.
Sometime it only need just a step and a handshake to change so much.
I talk on experience...

Hope you have a good Easter.
Regard
P.S. (and just for the record) I did not make any 'offer' (as suggested in your first line) in my earlier posting.

I merely made a suggestion that you might want to contact a theatrical agent.

I regret to inform you though, that I have no connections in that area of expertise/business.
[quote][p][bold]daveintiptree[/bold] wrote: @Mick Lavelle Thank you for the offer, But my career is secured enough. And I'm glad that you smile at it. I don't reject that you may have suffer of the building work and been upset about certain thing. But what now, are you going to fight endlessly with them. Go on just move on step by step things will get better and maybe if you go and talk to the chap. Maybe not the owner as you have a lot of hunger against. But go and talk to the people inside that make this place run. I'm absolutely sure that they will look after you and try to help you too. I never seen bad people and drunk guest or bad behaving patron at the Stockwell. Maybe as close neighbor you may say either wise but I'm sure if you try to contact them they will do the best to make your family life better. At the end I respect your passion and really thumbs up you effort to have things done right if you believe that is either affect your own house or your citizen right. But now what? the place is in here you have to live with it, try to make it work and live with them too. Sometime it only need just a step and a handshake to change so much. I talk on experience... Hope you have a good Easter. Regard[/p][/quote]P.S. (and just for the record) I did not make any 'offer' (as suggested in your first line) in my earlier posting. I merely made a suggestion that you might want to contact a theatrical agent. I regret to inform you though, that I have no connections in that area of expertise/business. Mick Lavelle
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree