Friday, October 28, 2011

Planning regulations?

Royal Victoria Hotel Grade II listed building ignored by planners?

There seems to be various advertising and new doors appearing on this one time revered building -but no enforcement. Is some official going to make the landlord of the East Bar take down his plastic first floor advertising board, before it's been there four years, and he no longer has to reinstate the balcony?



Posted by Anonymous to swanageview at 28/10/11 9:19 AM

103 comments:

Anonymous said...

I don't know why dont you call PDC and find out. Or ask a local councillor.

Anonymous said...

"I emailed the planners asking whether the East Bar fascia had planning permission"
22.10.2010

Anonymous said...

Why do you care if it has a plastic sign up?

Get a hobby and get a life.

Anonymous said...

Because this is perhaps an example of the "lazy,overpaid,venal and useless" planning officers?

Anonymous said...

Because this is perhaps an example of the "lazy,overpaid,venal and useless" planning officers?

Well I have to agree on that one I informed them of a blatant breach of planning rules even who carried out the work etc etc, and guess what did nothing zilch nowt, probably worried about their pensions :(

Anonymous said...

So hang on, they didn't build anything new, or add an extension, but put a new sign up.

And you're complaining?

I really pity someone with that kind of ethos.

Anonymous said...

I have to laugh when I read about rejected planning applications for the Pier Head development, and the ersatz 'palm' roof on the Tiki Bar across from the Royal Vic.

If one takes the whole Royal Vic complex as 'in keeping with the area' then you might as well allow anything.

I considered buying a flat in that building many years ago. Thank goodness I didn't.

On another note: would the traffic warden venture down that way and issue some parking tickets for cars parked on double lines...sometimes for hours?

David Furmage said...

Actully if you look from the seafront The Victora Hotel is the only Victorian building left. So everything around it looks out off place, not the vic ;)

And did you not know double yellow lines are miracle lines , they heal people with their blue badges:)

Anonymous said...

I too complained about this some time ago and never even had a reply. I suppose if we elect a district council of philistines with no real grasp of why old buildings should be preserved this is what happens. Their attitude unfortunately seems to reflect the inability of many of the general public and alas of posters here who completely fail to understand this.

Anonymous said...

"why old buildings should be preserved"
I admit it then
I would have thought high-quality buildings should be preserved, not just old ones
try to explain if you want

Anonymous said...

Hang on, no altercations have been made to the building, they've merely put a new sign up.

I bet the building, if used for public use, had new signs going up to garner business regularly.

Surely you have better things to do than get your knickers in a twist over a sign.

Then again, you probably don't.

Anonymous said...

No the balcony railings have gone.
The symmetry of the building is ruined.
If the building is so unimportant get it delisted.
It's an affront to others who live in listed buildings/the conservation area who are made to maintain their premises as are, no PVC windows etc
Remember the Purbeck Hotel and all the trouble they had over just a couple of small signs?
Let's have some even handedness here.

Anonymous said...

Small signs on the Purbeck? Small? They were large bulbous plastic illumunated signs and the people running the pub tried to make out that nobody would know it was a boozer if they did not have them. The fact is they were put up without a moments thought for what would be suitable and appropriate in that location and I can only say that this lack of respect for where they are trading is anything but unique to the Purbeck, as we see with the East Bar. Why on earth do people come and do business in listed buildings in a conservation area without giving soome thought to why their premises have these designations. Is it stupidity or ignorance or do they think that the money motive is all that matters?

Anonymous said...

It is curious that the Chinese restaurant was asked to remove a plastic fascia at about the time the Purbeck had to take their plastic signs down but the much larger rubbish at the East Bar seems to enjoy some form of exemption. What is going on?

Anonymous said...

'.....or do they think that the money motive is all that matters?'

Snap!

And anyone who thinks otherwise is fooling themselves.

Anonymous said...

Precisely and that is why we need a properly enforced system for ensuring that old buildings are are not messed up. Considering that this has been the accepted position for a great many years it is depressing to find people in Swanage who find this surprising. It is equally depressing that it is seem as a set of arbitrary rules, imposed from afar but I suppose if you are dealing with greed and ignorance that may be the only way to do it.

David Furmage said...

So are you accusing the landlord off paying the planners to be quiet about this sign?

Anonymous said...

If the occupants of other nearby premises are "persuaded" to remove rubbishy plastic from listed buildings and as these excresences on the East Bar been drawn to the planners attention more than once without anything being done about it we can only draw our own conclusions. Yours is an interesting suggestion. Do you think this is the case?

David Furmage said...

I for one know the landlord of this pub , he has worked very hard and ploughed alot of time and money into making what the east bar is today. I would say he is an honest man. If there seems to be a problem with something to do to with the building that upset you , why not ask him in person. If that don't work then go through the proper procedure. Simple!

Anonymous said...

Perhaps the blind eye is because PDC staff get a discount at Harry's sports bar?

Anonymous said...

East bar is up for sale anyway so you can ask the new owners if and when.

David Furmage said...

Certain companies get discount at the Purbeck Sports Centre and at Harry's Bar. It's a thing called " Perks " been around for quite some time. Maybe they do a loyatiy card system says for example you buy 8 coffees then you get one free ;)

Anonymous said...

I think PDC staff get 50% off all food and drink. I wonder if they pay tax on this perk? All seems a bit "venal" to me.

Anonymous said...

I was not aware that working hard entitled you to exemption from the rules the rest of us follow. Thats an odd idea Dave, and as for going throught the proper channels, what do you think we have been doing? This has nothing to do with the personal qualities of the man responsible for destroying the valcony. Even if he has a saint he has spoilt a listed Georgian building.

We all know that the former Royal Victoria Hotel is compromised by twentieth century additions at the front but it is quite mind bggling that anyone should defend making it worse by putting lumps of plastic where a balcony was on a Georgian boilding. Why on earth are we having this discussion? Why are some posters casting around for justifications for this damage to the building? There is a bsolutely no case to be made for it. What needs to be addresssed is why PDC, one of whose functions is preventing changes like this, has taken no action.

David Furmage said...

" I for one know the landlord of this pub , he has worked very hard and ploughed alot of time and money into making what the east bar is today. I would say he is an honest man. If there seems to be a problem with something to do to with the building that upset you , why not ask him in person. If that don't work then go through the proper procedure. Simple! "

Does it say anywhere above in my comment that the landlord is excempt from the rules that the rest of us must follow?

And why we having this discussion ? Well it's called a blog site where people can voice their opinions and someone , who we don't know brought up the subject to discuss.

Anonymous said...

I think the point of the original post was to remind readers that if the sign board remains unchallenged for four years it will automatically gain lawful approval.

Anonymous said...

just to add fuel to the fire I heard the club got raided last night drugs ?

David Furmage said...

And that has what to do with this subject? If you have information about something else , please do us a favour and put it under new subject. Thank you;)

Anonymous said...

And that has what to do with this subject? If you have information about something else , please do us a favour and put it under new subject. Thank you;)

It has relevance mr furmage as I have allready stated the east bar is for sale and the other end ie the club is on dodgy ground re lience so it may appear that both ends of this building may be "moving on" so to speak ergo giving people more of a chance to have some input re this building which seems to fill lots of posts on here so yes it is relevant!
I have allways cut you slack mr furmage but you are coming across as a pomous A$$ sir!

Anonymous said...

The club isnt on dodgy ground. You clearly know nothing.

And ruined a building? It's a bloody sign. Get a hobby that doesn't involve being a petty, pathetic misery.

I mean there are much more worthy causes you could take up other than making up lies about bar seven and moaning about a sign.

Anonymous said...

The club isnt on dodgy ground. You clearly know nothing.

Is it not? drugs officers in on saturday night? noise complaints, underage drinking! Yes I do know something. Perhaps "it better be carefull" might be more appropiate.

But the east bar is for sale or dont I know about that either.

Anonymous said...

How do you know this about the club? Or are you just making assumptions.


East Bar is common knowledge.

Anonymous said...

There have certainly been complaints about noise, anti-social behaviour and criminal damage in the lower High Street. By a remarkable coincidence this is worst at about the time Bar 7 closes at the weekend and on Wednesdays when there are cheap drinks. Why it should be a major task to persuade a few dozen folk to walk away without shouting and hitting one another I do not know but apparently it is. Of course this is by no means the first time there have been complaints and it has come close to loosing its license in the past. Lets hope the customers manage to grow up a bit and take themselves of home with less upset and the bar can keep going.

The East Bar is advertised at http://www.estatesgazette.com/propertylink/advert/the_east_bar-_high_street_swanage_bn19_2ln-3184726.htm and is a very reasonable £795,000. It is described as a "premier sports bar" but is not clear what sports are on offer.

David Furmage said...

Just seems like we are going off the track here a bit. The first post was about the sign and the railing. So has anyone heard back from planning then about this?

Anonymous said...

But you can't prove that it was bar seven customers that done the damage and caused the noise.

Last week a window was smashed late at night and the club was blamed. It wasn't even open that night.

Anonymous said...

"But you can't prove that it was bar seven customers that done the damage and caused the noise"

Au contraire, there is plenty of cctv footage and sound recordings of them milling around in the road outside it making a lot of noise with the police breaking up fights from time to time. You may claim that an entirely different group of people who congregate there between two and three in the morning, creep up in the shadows on the door of the bar and then erupt across the road but on the balance of probabilities it is rather more likely that it is bar customers.

Anonymous said...

Seen this footage have you?

David Furmage said...

HELLO ;)

Anonymous said...

SO HAS anyone heard back from planning then about this?

Anonymous said...

"Seen this footage have you?"

Yes. Edited highlights are going to the chief constable, licensing board, MP etc.

Who should I be looking for?

No response to me from planning about the East Bar, despite a reminder. I know their policy is to ignore small changes in private dwellings, e.g. upvc windows in listed buildgings but this is rather more.

In answer to the question of why object to unpleasant changes to old buildings, all I can say is that if you have to ask the question you are so far from understanding the issues, both in simple terms of terms of conservation and the commercial advantages to the centre of Swanage in preserving the built environment, that nothing I say here is going to make any difference. Heritage is one of the nations largest industries. Millions go to National Trust properties every year. Large numbers of visitors to Swanage say they like the way it is different from the modern and cloned town centres they are used to.

Anonymous said...

yea but Swanage isn't what it is marketed as
it's, more Regency than Victorian
judging by recent developments and immediate post war rebuilds it is in danger of becoming a film set
OK look after the good old bits, but put immaculate modern buildings on the rest
stuff pastiche

Anonymous said...

How are you in the position to see the footage? Is it available to the public?

Anonymous said...

Thought I wouldn't get a reply

Anonymous said...

Its bad enough having disgruntled holiday let visitors going home and grumbling about sleepless nights in their flats in the high street to their friends and relatives without adding to the reputational damage to Swanage by publishing footage of a bunch of exited drunks standing in the middle of the road holding animated conversations at three in the morming with the odd fist fight breaking out. Hence, no, the cctv record is not publically available.

Anonymous said...

So my question stands, how has the above person seen it?

Michael Bird said...

LETS JUST GET A FEW THINGS STRAIGHT HERE SHALL WE?
THIS IS FACT NOT RUMOURS:
Bar Se7en has NEVER been drug raided and has NEVER had drug officers "raiding" at night, the actual FACT is that we have been swobbed for drugs, and the results showed a 0% trace, which for any nightclub/late night bar in this country is quite an achievement.
Also, another FACT, bar se7en underwent a 6 week investigation into noise pollution, and it was decided that noise issues on the lower high street are not directly linked with the venue.
One more fact for those "Anonymous" posts, the East Bar & Club (Bar 7) has probably been in this town alot longer than you, so why move into the most vibrant night time area in town if you want a quiet life? Try living in Coventry or Birmingham, then you'll see what anti social behaviour is.

Stop hiding behind the Anonymous tag, my name in Michael Bird and I co-own the lease to Bar Se7en, feel free to approach me directly with any of your concerns on info@barse7en.com.

If i see anymore posts based on rumours on this site, I will be taking legal action as this business is my living.

Michael Bird said...

Also, ONE more FACT, the club's license is not on dodgy ground, so get use to idea of us hanging around for a while yet.

Anonymous said...

" ..it was decided that noise issues on the lower high street are not directly linked with the venue. " Is that in writing somewhere? Can you post a copy? I gather that at the PACT meeting the other day, when the police said there is definitely a problem, it was pretty much agreed that the problems all stem from Bar7, as there's nowhere else people would be coming from at 3 or 4 in the morning..

Michael Bird said...

I am not going to be drawn into an online debate with an "Anonymous" person.
I have just stated some FACTS.

Anonymous said...

You may say they are facts: why should anyone believe you? You may just be inventing 'facts' that suit your purpose.

Anonymous said...

Michael, talking of rumours & facts, whats the truth regarding Jenkins newsagents in the lower high street under investigation by trading standards for selling alcohol to under 18s?
Also, who can be contacted to enquire whether you "facts" about the 0% drug results and the noise issues not just being linked to the club?

Anonymous said...

And just who are you to chuck accusations around when you haven't even got the nerve to state your name. If you were at that pact meeting you would categorically know that Inspector baker said the issues were not directly linked with just Bar se7en.

Michael Bird said...

Sorry I won't be drawn on rumours regarding other businesses, Im only concerned about my own on this subject.
Proof of our drug swob results can be confirmed by the Inspector of Purbeck Policing at Wareham Police Station (Tracey Baker) and all information regarding noise issues can be discussed with Dermot Coulhan at Environmental Health, based in Wesport House, Wareham (Purbeck District council)

Anonymous said...

This comment is directed at the moron two statements above.

phil bird said...

I have read the blog with interest. I find it interesting that some of the writers hide behind the tag 'Anonymous'. Why ? Do they have something to hide ?
There has been noise in the lower high street for fifty years and more. It used to be a lot worse when in the 60's every weekend saw two or more police 'meat wagons' and a dozen police officers waiting for the pubs to turn out. There used to be running battles up and down the high street. The punters had no where to go so they had 'lock ins' , house parties or used to just hang around.
Most of the properties in the lower high street have new owners in the last few years.
So knowing this why would anyone buy a property in this area knowing that it was noisy? Especially if they, or the people they rent to, want a quite life. Is it because the price is a little lower
because of the location and also the area is good for business because of the location.
I agree planning regs should be followed. However, Mr or Mrs Anonymous, to be honest, whats a few signs ?

Anonymous said...

I post anonymously because I have my own blog with google, and i fear if I put my name to it, and posted here, some people would use the opportunty to berate me on my blog.

But I haven't been posting false rumours and stories and not finding out the facts about Bar 7 and the East Bar.

Phil Bird says that it was worse in the 60's, which coincidently is probably when most of the terminal moaners and whingers on here were of the age where they were going on out every weekend and making noise and being drunk.

Then again many do look on the past through rose tinted glasses.

Again, I think it's worth noting that those who hide behind anonimity haven't had the facts, contacts or info to back up their spurious claims, yet Mike has come on here, told everyone who he is, given everyone the facts and told everyone where these facts can be verified.

I know who I'm going to believe.

The Postman said...

Sure, there's always been some noise in the Lower High Street - but it's only relatively recently that places have had licences until 3.30 or so, so people are still carousing on the streets at 4am. And the problems are not just confined to the Lower High Street: people are complaining from streets off the High Street (B&B guests not coming back), from far up the High Street (smashed windows near the Mill Pond), from Victoria Avenue and even from Ulwell Road: all people returning home after 3.30 am. At least the police have now recognised that this is a problem that needs sorting.

phil bird said...

To be fair I do not think the people who moan are the people who were out on the razzle in the 60's. I still see many of them now around town and indeed many of their children are now using the same establishments.
No I think it is people who move here from elsewhere and perhaps want to change whats been here for years.
I repeat whats the point of buying a property in a noisy area and then complaining ?

Michael Bird said...

One more FACT: Bar Se7en has a 3am License and does not trade a minute beyond. So Im not quite sure where 3.30 has come from.
Please stop posting false information.

Jon wood said...

Jon Ashley wood
I read this blog with utter contempt for the anonamous and pompous git posting about the club(bar 7) and my local the east bar (even tho I don't live in swanage anymore)
Can we find out who this Pratt is ?

"this is a local town for local people"

Viva the club forever......!!!x

Jon wood ( jnr )! said...

And also one more thing anonamous twat....
Free food in Harry's?
Have you met my uncle?
You got more chance of kissing the popes arse than getting a free meal!!
Hahaha

Juliette Crossin said...

What a shame that this person finds it necessary to make false accusations against honest hard working people.My uncle owned this club when I was young and now my cousin owns it.I don't think the probems facing Mike are any different to what faced Phil all those years ago. Perhaps you should take a step back and realise this is someones livelihood you are putting at risk? I have no issue with anyone raising concerns but do it through the correct channels instead of using the internet as a tool for your obvious anger!

Gemma Morton said...

Whoever keeps spreading rumours regarding Bar Se7en trading beyond their licence regulations needs to come down and stand at the bar at 3am and hear TIME being called!! NO drinks are served beyond 3am!!

As Michael Bird has stated noise levels were investigated over a 6 week period by Environmental Health and no problems were found....FACT!!
It is not the responsibility of Bar Se7en staff to follow customers up the road ensuring they keep their voices down!

If people have complaints to make they should head down to Bar Se7en and personally speak to Michael Bird or Nathan Turner.

The Postman said...

I do apologize if I got the licensing time wrong.
I agree "It is not the responsibility of Bar Se7en staff to follow customers up the road ensuring they keep their voices down!" But the main reason for the problems still lie with loads of drunken people wending their home in the early hours. It's not rocket science to work out a solution to the problem, is it?

Anonymous said...

The solution isn't to ruin people livelihood, I for a fact know that the guys at bar se7en & other active members of pubwatch are doing their best to work with the Police in all playing their part in on tackling anti social behaviour, which happens in every town, and the few problems in Swanage are nothing compared to other towns, you really should get a life and let the pubs/bars, club to focus on running their businesses and tackling these issues face on.
I remain anonymous as I am friends with both sides of people involved.

Anonymous said...

Juliette, theres a difference between raising concerns and making false accusations. Many on this message board have been doing the latter.

The Postman, what is the solution to your problem? Especially when Mike has pointed out that the noise pollution on the lower high street can't be directly attributed to Bar Seven?

Anonymous said...

The issue of people causing a disturbence on route home at 3am and later could come from any of the bars in town! As they all have a 2am licence. I for one know that bar se7en is probebly one of only a few that sticks strictly to its licence. There are some pubs on the high street that carry on way past there opening hours.(Maybe these premises contribute more to the issue). I think that maybe the individuals in question are the ones to blame and if they are breaking the law, it is a matter for the police to investigate, gather evidence and seek some form of prosecution. If no crime is commited which i amagine is most commenly the case, these people need to realise that moving really is the best option.Homes on busy routes and in the town centre are cheap for a reason!!!!

Anonymous said...

There is a concept well known to lawyers throughout the country which holds that one cannot "move to a nuisance" and then complain about the nuisance. What that means is that if you purchase a house next to an existing business establishment, it is up to you to make sure that you understand the kind of noise, odors and other issues that may effect you produced by that establishment and to ensure that you will be able to live with that establishment as your neighbour.
It is considered to be unfair to the establishment for people to move next to it knowing full well that it is an operating establishment, and then complain afterwards that they cannot tolerate the noise, odor or other problems relating to the establishment. That is why they say that one cannot move to a nuisance and then complain about the nuisance.

Anonymous said...

you wouldn't move near a airport and then complain about the noise of the planes would you.

Anonymous said...

and what if when you moved in, the planes stopped flying at midnight, but then a few years later they starting flying all night long, eh?

Anonymous said...

move then you miserable c ***

Anonymous said...

so at least you admit your argument is wrong

Anonymous said...

But if you move to an area of the town that contains the majoirty of pubs and always has done don't whinge about some noise at the weekends in the early hours.

It's always happened, always will.

Criminal damage is another matter and shouldn't happen, but noisy drunks is as inevitable as bears pooing in the woods.
You should have realised that when moving in.

Anonymous said...

There is also the point that it was the local authoritys with the government of the day that created the later licences.If you lived in the area before they changed why did you not object then not 6 years later. This clearly does not make this situation the fault of the landlord. If you didnt complain when you had the chance then you now have to live with it.Any one who moves here after cant complain about an exiting nusince, which im hasent to add hasnt officialy been established by any of the licencing authoritys.

Anonymous said...

I find it also hard to appreciate that it would be in the crowns intrest to pursue any of these premises as we are not talking about the majority of the public sharing these bitter, unsensicle views.
Thank god these people no longer represent the public on the local council.

Anonymous said...

probably because they aren't local.

Mr & Mrs Slater said...

Mr & Mrs Slater JENKINS NEWS
We have just been emailed to view the comments on this blog. This is the first time we have made a comment on this or any other blog site!! Obviously someone knows something we dont, regarding that of being invesigated by Trading Standards. But we shall be asking them this question as sooon as their offices open in the morning. After going through the other comments on this blog, from the annonymous posts, we have come to the conclusion that the majority of the comments are nonsense, and it's probably best that you take them with a pinch of salt.

Anonymous said...

anonymous you are talking rubbish!!!!

Anonymous said...

no i think YOUR argument is wrong actually. you shouldn't be on here causing all of this you should feel embarased and full of shame not being able to go and speak your mind to the people your talking about instead you write it on here...why because your a sly coward.

Anonymous said...

So will the people disparaging the East Bar, Bar Seven and Jenkins own up to what they have done from the list below.

1. Made up rumours/lied about those establishments to suit whatever agenda they have.

2. Passed on a rumour they had heard without knowing the facts.

3. Jumped to conclusions.

4. Made wild accusations with out speaking to the owners/managers and finding out facts.

Own up and you may claw back some of the dignity you have lost.

Michael Bird said...

Well said above. Its not fair on the businesses, they are people's livelihoods that don't deserve to be ruined by a lonely, jealous & small minded person/s

Anonymous said...

Late night noise at the weekend is fair enough. But opening until 3am from Wednesday means residents get woken up for half the week at around 3.30.

And drunken vandalism is inexcusable at any time. Lots of drainpipes and front windows in the high street have been broken in the last few months by people too drunk to know what they are doing. It's the drunk who is doing it but who is serving people until they get in this state? Bars are not allowed to serve drunk people and bouncers could turf them out earlier.

Practical solutions? Turn off all street lights from midnight so that drunks might remember it's residential and that people are asleep. Encourage drunks to get taxis home rather than staggering back, so have taxis waiting?

Michael Bird said...

Vandalism is inexcusable, I agree, and I would happily refuse entry to anyone caught & convicted of any such offence.
Yet again though, from Wednesday onwards you no doubt are referring to Bar 7, when there is other pubs open till 2am on Sunday, Monday & Tuesday as well AND Bar 7 is only open Friday & Saturdays throughout October & November so please do not point any direct blame at us every time something happens. There was a window put though at the Fish mongers recently on a Wednesday night and we were not even open that night, but still were getting the blame!!
As for taxi's, people can't be forced into one! and I cannot insist on taxi's being available as its not my business, but more often than not there are some around late at night.

May I also point out regarding previous comments on this blog that SLANDER is against the law and I am now taking legal advice over some comments made on this site over numerous blogs that I have read recently.

Anonymous said...

Other pubs and bars are open late and I'm not pointing the blame at any one business. But I think all pub/bar owners should take some responsibility.

Drinking happens in all towns. What makes Swanage a better place to live than most towns is precisely because people of all ages live in the centre. It feels safe. In most towns you don't get the mix of ages going out and enjoying themselves and going home a bit worse for wear. But at half three in the morning it is drunk youths causing damage to property and each other. It's not a big problem but it's still a nuisance.

Anonymous said...

How can you prove it's youths?

I've seen may people, 30/40+ drunk at 3am or later being more violent/aggresive/loud than people who you'd consider youths.

I'm not saying youths aren't responsible for some of it, but to blame them for all of it is wrong, and you probably say/think that because it fits your agenda - something like Swanage for second home owners who are 50+ only.

As for taxi's, how do you expect someone who's just spent all their money on booze to afford a taxi after midnight on double time? It costs me nearly £7 on a Saturday night to get home, thats 2 pints!

As for turning off street lights, what a moronic suggestion. Yes it may remind drunk people it's night time (I doubt even the most drunk of drunks is that stupid) but it would be harder for CCTV to catch anything going on and make it easier for people to get away with things under cover of darkness.

One final thing, as Mike has said before, noise on the lower high steet can't directly be attributed to Bar 7.

Actually, one other final thing. I'm dissapointed but not at all suprised that those cowards who made false allegations and lied about those in charge at Bar 7, The East Bar and Jenkins haven't come foward and apologised.

Shame.

Anonymous said...

I can't help thinking Mr Bird's attitude is at the heart of the problem. In his posting, all protesting innocence, he appears to be saying:

There is no problem, its all malicious rumours

Noise and damage caused by his customers are nothing to do with him if they occur after they have left the premises

Despite there being no problem things used to be a lot worse

Doing anything about it would be bad for business, hence a business which has always caused noise nuisance should be allowed to do this perpetually.

and lastly he can't see whats wrong with fouling up old buildings.

I think thats a fair summary but he is at liberty to correct this.

Anonymous said...

What is wrong with you, you gigantic moron. Mike hasn't denied noise and vandalism happening, he stated it can't be attributed to the club, and provided contacts for people at the relevant authorities to verify that.

I've heard of selective hearing, the person above must gave selective reading.

Also mikes attitude is fine, and I know he is activley involved in the local pubwatch scheme whose aim is to deal with these problems.

Michael Bird said...

I think you may have some of my comments mixed up with another person with the surname Bird on this blog, yet again your not getting your facts right.
I am not denying SOME issues in the lower high street at night may/could have been caused by persons leaving my premises, but you need proof before throwing accusations, not hearsay.
And to say my attitude is at the heart of these problems, I could not do more in helping to prevent problems, such as:

Regular meetings with the Police (can be confirmed if you need proof by Swanage SNT)

Monthly Pubwatch meetings (my attendance can be confirmed by the Chairman of the scheme, Ross Shakespear)

Employing, at a very high cost, 2-3 SIA licensed door staff (CerHold security)

Polycarbonate glassware is used Friday & Saturday nights, another high expense

I think you, Mr Anonymous, could well be the problem as your trying to create a picture that shows a much bigger problem than there actually is, why don't you come out Saturday night and watch how we operate for yourself, then judge.

Michael Bird said...

And I will not be making any further comments on here, as Ive previously stated, I now intend to proceed with legal action.

Anonymous said...

to many "anonymous" on here!

Jack said...

1. Complaining about someone else's property is for uber douche bags! Unless it hurts people.

2.If you want peace and quiet don't move to the center of a British sea side town, next to the 2 most popular venues.

3. You can't keep drunk people quiet, so stop crying about that.

4. If you hate Swanage and it's people so much LEAVE, i'm sure Wareham or Upton will be a better fit for ya ;]


THANK YOU AND GOODNIGHT

Anonymous said...

I think the original meaning of this topic has ended up being over looked, so let's get it back on track.

The first post was this -

There seems to be various advertising and new doors appearing on this one time revered building -but no enforcement. Is some official going to make the landlord of the East Bar take down his plastic first floor advertising board, before it's been there four years, and he no longer has to reinstate the balcony?


Now first of all, I've been drinking in the East Bar since I was 18, some 7 years now. In that time I have never seen a new door. There were only two doors I could get in then, and only two now.

I don't quite know what the person means by reinstating the balcony.

Also, it appears by what you've written that the East Bar used to be a hotel. Now if it was, I imagine it used to have advertising to try and generate custom, much as the pub does now.

If you had lived here when it was a hotel, would you have objected to the advertising then?

And what does time revered even mean?

Anonymous said...

I think the original meaning of this topic has ended up being over looked, so let's get it back on track.

The first post was this -

There seems to be various advertising and new doors appearing on this one time revered building -but no enforcement. Is some official going to make the landlord of the East Bar take down his plastic first floor advertising board, before it's been there four years, and he no longer has to reinstate the balcony?


Now first of all, I've been drinking in the East Bar since I was 18, some 7 years now. In that time I have never seen a new door. There were only two doors I could get in then, and only two now.

I don't quite know what the person means by reinstating the balcony.

Also, it appears by what you've written that the East Bar used to be a hotel. Now if it was, I imagine it used to have advertising to try and generate custom, much as the pub does now.

If you had lived here when it was a hotel, would you have objected to the advertising then?

And what does time revered even mean?

Anonymous said...

Changes to a listed building require listed building consent. This does not appear to have been obtained. Similarly with planning permission. Why? Do the owners think they are exempt from this when it comes to promoting their business? Judging by the tone of some comments there are people who hold this mistaken view.

Anonymous said...

Other than signage that can be removed/isn't permanent, what changes have been made to it?

Also what's so special about the building? It's not ugly like the mowlem, but its nothing special, nor does it hold any historical significance.

Anonymous said...

Doesn't matter. Unfortunately you do not seem to understand what this is about. You are unaware of why we have the listing system and of conservation areas which is not simply to preserve buildings that are some sort of national treasures. Buildings are not listed for aesthetic reasons. The conservation system is in place, and there is no debate about whether it should be, which you seem to want to discuss. The discussion is about whether changes to a listed building in a conservation area had the required OKs. If you want to learn more about why we have a conservation system there is a good deal of information on line you could read which might give you a better insight into what it is all about.

Anonymous said...

Well you haven't told me why it's in place yourself despite supporting it so it must be quite hard to understand.

I know what it is, and why it's in place, I just think it's a bit stupid and pointless to have a building listed that has no architectual, historical or cultural impact or relevance.

I love the way you seem to say 'thats the way it is, so deal with it' Yea, we should never question things that don't make sense.

Anonymous said...

It really is not practical to set out the history and rationale of building conservation in this forum. You seem to want it reduced to a few paragraphs. Why don't you do a little reading on the subject rather than express uninformed opinions? If something does not make sense to you why not find out more about it so you have some reason for questioning it. If you can't be bothered you can hardly expect anyone to give any credence to your views.

Anonymous said...

There are areas of the country where the planning system is considerably relaxed in order to encourage investment and development. Perhaps those with businesses who find the system here too onerous should consider relocating to these so the rest of us can continue to enjoy our town unsullied by their activities.

Anonymous said...

What activities? And how do you know this isn't one such area?

I do understand building conservation, it just seems to stringent and restrictive on buildings where it doesn't need to be stringent and restrictive. No one has given me a good reason why the building in question is special, or why it shouldn't have additions like a sign other than 'it used to be a hotel'

No one has answered what new doors have gone on the East Bar yet, and no one has really said what the problem with the sign is other than that it's against certain rules and regs.
It hardly spoils the building does it?

Anonymous said...

Jeepers, have you looked at the sign and the rubbish where the balcony was? If you can't see whats wrong with them I have to say thats your failing. You really don't get it at all.

Anonymous said...

Why is it my failing?

Am I failure as a person because of it?

Or am I better than you because irrelevant things like this don't upset me and if something does irk me it's something more important than a sign.

Anonymous said...

You people need to find a hobbie!
I could see the concerns with regards to the lack of planning if there had been an extension added to the building or anything that actually changed the building permanently, but from what I can see the signs are neither I don't even give them a second glance now!

With regards to the club, I think that peoples perception of the venue is generally good and certainly there is a heigher percentage of residents that like the venue than that don't.
I think the club gets blamed unfairly for the majority of problems as its the last venue open at night so the complainers are obviously but nieively putting 2 and 2 together to come up with 13.
I think that you would find that if the club was closed earlier of an evening it would make a very small change or even no difference at all to the anti social behaviour or noise levels
at all, as there are multiple other venues for people to frequent, let alone the illegal rave/club area on the beach commonly known as zig-zags.
I think I time that you people face up to it and realise that society has changed along with how people enjoy the night time economy. It's not up to the club or any other venue to take responsibility for any criminal damage caused during and Immediatly after opening hours but maybe people should look more towards educating and disaplining there children in how to behave and how they behave themselves.
There is also another cause for the lack of respect or disaplin with in the younger people and some of the older in Swanage, that is the fact that the police will never deal with offenders properly, very rarely arresting or even ticketing people! Theye are mearly giving a little telling off and dropped at home! There is no wonder that people are willing to push the boundaries if there aren't any conciquenses for them to face!
I recently witnessed two police officers sat in there car opposite east bar watching two young males shouting abuse at the bouncers working at the club for about 35 Mins and they didn't even get out of there car, all be it that thans not a seriouse offence but what impression does that give the two males involved? I can guerentee you that if that had happened in Weymouth or Bournemouth then the males would have been delt with effectively by the police, not just left to do what they pleased.