Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Black Cherry without the garden has no real smoking options, will be overlooked in summer months in favour of drinking establishments with gardens, is not being allowed to self police a degree of control over its own premises because one neighbour had a moan. (By the way "neighbour", I hope to God you're not planning to enjoy the odd BBQ this summer - it might spoil the tranquility of the new "Yo Sushi" some people seem to want - or, same "neighbour", I do hope you're not basking in the reflective glory of owning a house that is so close to the fabled (yet mostly sh-i-te) Lordship Lane with its "quirky businesses" that has boosted your property price so much...)


Get a frigging grip - BC are responsible license holders that have mainly kept their noses clean. It's a family Business and deserves the same breaks as that God-awful Greene king pub - The Bishop, and the coke / footy hooligan hang out they call the Magdala.

I've been in the 'God-awful Greene king pub' dozens of times and consistently had good service, good food, and good beer.


I went in Black Cherry when it first opened, and the service wasn't very good, so I've never been back, and never needed to, as there's so much competition on 'mostly sh-i-te Lordship Lane' - maybe I'm not the only one, maybe that's why they're not getting punters in. Just a thought.

I tend to squat with Team Snorks myself regarding the logic behind this. I don't understand why it's suddenly an issue.


Mind you, I'm not quite clear whether this is a building extension issue or a garden issue?


If it's a building extension then it can't be related to the smoking ban, as surely there'd be no smoking in it? Also there would seem to have to be a massive uplift in trade sustained over a very long period just to repay the building work wouldn't there? That kind of investment doesn't seem to reflect an organisation teetering on the brink of bankruptcy?


If it's the garden, well I can understand the frustration re. The Bishop, and the opportunity to get more smokers through the door. However the local residents should be entitled to retain the value in their properties and their own peace of mind by not having a new beer garden opened up. The BC shouldn't be wielding examples of other pubs in other places as either emotional blackmail or a threat of closure.


It seems to smack a leedle beeet of 'Unless I'm the captain it's my ball and I'm going home with it'.

Just to point out that Snorky never said a word against the Black Cherry, he just suspects that the original post may not have been from an unbiased caring punter. I'm wth him.


However, it's by the by really, the issue still remains, and no one is saying close down the Cherry!

Despite being pro smoking-ban in pubs, I would support the Cherry's moves to have the outside rear-area.


I do hear what people say about not wanting smoke drifting into their gardens but having lived next door to pubs before smoke's the least of one's worries. I actually liked the chatter drifting over from the gardens.


And it is a pretty small area too - it's not like the beer garden of the bishop's sister pub in Herne Hill which had an ACRE of people outside surrounded by houses


If you have a house adhacent to a pub in London I would say you should be able to rub along with the neighbours a little better rather than expect similar tranquility to a Devon country-house


I'm sure someone will come on and detail just how bad it CAN be and I'm open to persuasion - but on balance.....

SeanMG


I would agree wholeheartedly with you if someone had moved in next to an existing pub - no excuses. However if the neighbours to the BC moved in when it was a greengrocers, with 9-5 hours then I think they are allowed to feel slightly miffed at the changes going on next door to them. A friend of mine used to have trouble with Liquorish - again it was the change from a travel agent to a bar that made the difference - when they moved in they did not anticipate moving close to a bar.

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Despite being pro smoking-ban in pubs, I would

> support the Cherry's moves to have the outside

> rear-area.

>

> I do hear what people say about not wanting smoke

> drifting into their gardens but having lived next

> door to pubs before smoke's the least of one's

> worries. I actually liked the chatter drifting

> over from the gardens.

>

> And it is a pretty small area too - it's not like

> the beer garden of the bishop's sister pub in

> Herne Hill which had an ACRE of people outside

> surrounded by houses

>

> If you have a house adhacent to a pub in London I

> would say you should be able to rub along with the

> neighbours a little better rather than expect

> similar tranquility to a Devon country-house

>

> I'm sure someone will come on and detail just how

> bad it CAN be and I'm open to persuasion - but on

> balance.....


*whistles and stares at the ceiling*


No opinions here. Nope. Not one. ;-)

oh shoot annaj - I forgot. Umm... all depends on the pub in question of course!


* scrabbles around looking for something positive to say *

* gives up and goes back to work *


Cassius - good points as well there. I remember Liqourish opening and being quite surprised myself - I didn't expect travel agents to become bars. I would definitely be interested in seeing life from one of the houses in question tho - just to get an idea of how the reality is

Indeed, I would not choose to live next door to a bar (now I'm old) and all its attendant problems and if one moved in next to me now I would not be too chuffed, unlikely on my street thankfully.

Sean - my neighbour goes outside for a fag at around 11pm and the smoke from her one cigarette drifts into my bedroom window and is really unpleasant (especially as it's not a Marlboro). Clouds of fag smoke drifting in all night long would be unbearable. The chatter and chink chink of ice cubes is not such an issue.

I would trade places with a neighbour that smokes a fag instead of my current situation where a neighbour continually ties up a pit-bull with the most horrendous yelp morning noon and night. I feel for the dog but it does my head in


ummm.. sorry got distracted there


If a pub did it "all night long" I would be against it too - but 9:30-10pm seems a reasonable compromise IMO


As with many things, I do understand neighbours pov, but if I look to other countries where bars are open much later, with more r?-r? generally I wonder how those neigbours cope - or do they just join in or accept their lot? I dunno. It just SEEMS less problematic

Another way for them to make more money is to respond to people trying to make bookings.. Whilst I am all for it being kept open and will absolutely do my bit, last week I called and left two messages and emailed once with no response. Upon calling again on Saturday the 'manager' was extremely rude and said if I didnt bother speaking to anyone they werent going to make me a booking so we took our business elsewhere..


That does not sound like an establishment who desperately needs the money or clientelle to me.. Anyway rant over and yes I will do my bit to try to make sure they dont close..

Thanks for everyone who belives me!


Its kind of quite funny now all those who don't, ie team snorky.


Angela from BC emailed me to say thanks, even though she had no idea who I was, or even spoken to me.


I love it - innoncently started a riot! in which no one believes me cause - won't bother next time!

Snorks


Yes I did - is that not allowed? Evidently you have been 'stalking my posts' so i did the same to you - and you have replied about a whole load of things - sorry am I not allowed to?


All I wondered was is Nero Staying open. Now I'm wanting BC to stay open. Not allowed to ask a question? YOU ARE SOOOOOOOO SUSPICIOUS. Leave it be and just trust people or alternatively stop writing crap


snorky Wrote:



-------------------------------------------------------

> katy - you seem to have an interest in council

> planning appeals - a hobby of yours ? I see your

> first ever post was asking what the decison was on

> the on the neros situation a while ago.

>

> a curiously obtuse first post some might ask.

>

> some might also say that the the formal Black

> Cherry disclaimer notice serves more to arouse

> suspicions than to dampen it.

I have sympathy with the Black Cherry - but cannot see how not being able to expand into the back garden will kill the business. Their business model is a successfull one.


They may not be able to expand the business - but that is another issue.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...