Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Even 25 years ago the Grove was a good family pub - great from May through to late September in the garden with children, a barbeque in the summer. Because the garden was so large children weren't oppressive to the un-childed. Even the very early Harvester days weren't that bad, then it just seemed to lose direction, and, eventually, customers. With (originally) 2 good car parks it could have been quite an attractor for groups. That site, and that footprint, ought to give great opportunity to revive a pub there. It's a scandal it sits there boarded up and decaying. It's not as if there was too much commercial land about locally that that shoudn't need to be used.


But maybe the fact that virtually the 3 biggest (by footprint) boozers locally are all shut says something about changing mores and customs.

StraferJack Wrote:

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

> Dulwich Estate is Arsene Wenger and

> the Grove is Nicklas Bendtner - what can they do?

>


Superb.


Thanks everyone for the feedback on the piece and, more importantly, your thoughts and wisdom on the subject.


Trying not to think too much about pubs today due to deep hangover, but hopefully nothing a fry-up at Johnnies won't fix.



TDR

spider69 Wrote:


>

> Let it reopen as a normal local pub much as I

> remember it in th 1970's where you went for a pint

> and the children played in the garden. Unlike

> today where kids have to run around in the bar.

>

> It was a local not the "lets be seen expensive

> bars" that seem to be the norm in ED pricing thr

> local plebs out

>

> Showing my age


It was actually about the poshest pub in the area, apart from perhaps, believe or not, the Fox on the Hill. Both had very good, for the standard of the time, restaurants and, along with the Steak House in Dulwich Village were where people went if they wanted a meal out. I am pretty certain the the one in the Grove was called the Peacock Room or bar & Restaurant, can't remember. But I also think that gentleman had to wear a jacket and tie to be allowed into the restaurant. I only ate there once with a friends family when I was about 13 or 14 (1971/2) and it was very smart.

I have heard a rumour that there is a push to change the planning for the Grove from a licensed venue/hotel to a school. Given the fact SE22/21 are drastically short of primary school places, would this not be a better use for this site, given that Lordship Lane and Forest Hill have quite a number of pubs...

To Steveo 'They may not have had much to do with the three pubs being shut but I think it's beholden on us to at least let the Governors know that someone cares while they make up their minds whether they are conservators or a rapacious property company'


To me the answer is obvious - rapacious property company. Furthermore I think there is a masterplan behind it - to turn Dulwich into a place where the chains will pay over the odds rents for a presence. The evidence of their recent non renewal of leaseholders in Dulwich Village points to this. The Flower Shop have been given their marching orders after 2 generations, and that includes, I'm told, them getting evicted out of the upstairs flat.


The Estate always falls back on 'an obligation to maximise returns' argument - the reality is that there is a lot of leeway, as institutional landlords, as to how they behave. Rumour I'ver heard, whether true or not, is they are trying to bang through an underground car park on the SG Smith development site, so the planning is sitting nicely for them to open a small Waitrose where the SG Smith showroom is now. Rapacious property developers I can handle, the one that proper turns my stomach is their holier than thou hypocrisy around conservation.

  • 2 months later...

ladyruskin Wrote:

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

> Can't you apply for the grove tavern to be

> transferred into a community asset in a similar

> fashion to the Ivy House?


Community asset? over ?5 a pint when I called in during the summer Maybe I was'nt their type.

Mugglesworth Wrote:

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

> What were you drinking grace3? Beer starts at

> under ?3 a pint (Trumans) in the Ivy House.


Yeah, but as you know there are people who happily ignore differences in beer in terms of strength, quality and so on. Like people who see a ?12 bottle of wine and say, "?12?! I can get a bottle of wine for ?4!" The success of the Ivy House tells you all you need to know about how successful a community pub it is, but there are always moaners who'd preferred that it reamined shut.

steveo Wrote:

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

> > Community asset? over ?5 a pint when I called

> in

> > during the summer Maybe I was'nt their type.

>

>

> It's been shut for over a year so no you didn't



maybe you didn't fit in either?

twister Wrote:

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


> we would be happy to put into a community pub. Say

> that the Magdala/Mag/Patch...... Would be a better

> option for a community pub.



Don't understand, it's probably my fault, but could you explain what you mean?

  • 7 months later...

Shanikus Wrote:

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

> I have heard a rumour that there is a push to

> change the planning for the Grove from a licensed

> venue/hotel to a school. Given the fact SE22/21

> are drastically short of primary school places,

> would this not be a better use for this site,

> given that Lordship Lane and Forest Hill havej

> quite a number of pubs...


Hello I realise that I am coming v late to this thread : this week I heard (a rumour) that Lidl are moving into the Grove Tavern . Is this true? anyone know?

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
  • Latest Discussions

    • I will buy you a frothy coffee from anywhere you like on Lordship Lane if that happens. Most of these costs never get recovered from the drivers that caused them. The photo shows a car that's been left on the zigzags protecting the crossing. Pedestrians crossing East to West and drivers heading South won't see each other until the pedestrians are in the road. That is a dangerous position to leave a car in. (I don't know if it's stil there, obviously).
    • Seems a pretty dangerous position to me - apart from getting in the way of pedestrians trying to cross the road large vehicles heading south have to edge into the oncoming traffic lane to get past. I've got a normal-sized car and had to squeeze through a gap the other day.  
    • When a car is left damaged by the road-side it may be that the insurer is tasked with recovering the vehicle to assess it and (possibly) take it for repair. Only if it is in a dangerous position will the police recover it - which saves money for the tax-payer.  You may also have some recovery options with e.g. the AA (other organisations are available). Were the car to have been stolen or abandoned then it will take some time to sort this out, and again unless the vehicle is in a dangerous position the police won't be rushing to deal with that. Not sure who the 'they' are in this case.
    • I wouldn't like to speculate, Sue. Not my thing. Teddy Boy is your man on the ground for that sort of first-hand detail. It's six points for driving without insurance and six points for using a phone, so that's an automatic ban of at least six months. They're going to be practically uninsurable for a considerable period after that. So, nobody's hurt, a clearly crap driver is off the road for some time and the good burghers of SE22 get a lovely, shiny new post - probably paid for by the driver. Every cloud, and that. If only Franklins wasn't changing hands, Lordship Lane would be almost perfect.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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