Wednesday, 2 September 2009

The Ship

I have heard that The Ship pub/bar/cheap beer sports TV emporium has plans to extend licensing hours to 1.45AM at the weekend. Worse still, to extend the alcohol license to the external forecourt. And to allow bottles to be taken outside. Also to allow under 18s in!!!!

They also want to build a 1.9metre high screen (electric fence might be more appropriate), around the forecourt and move the entrance round to Wernbrook Street, yes that's the NICE QUIET RESIDENTIAL street which shouldn't have drunken yoofs staggering around at sleep o'clock waving glass bottles around.

Does this sound like a recipe for disaster? Errrr. It sounds like a complete catastrophe of atomic bomb proportions about to hit Plumstead Common in the face.

I urge everyone to write a letter to the council to object to this. Closing date for objections must be in by 18th September. Don't sit back and think, oh I'll do it tomorrow. Do it now. Stop reading this, get off your computer and do it now. Contact your local councillor, MP etc.

Find out more from the address below:-

Trading Standards & Licensing
Community Safety & Integrated Enforcement
Riverside House
Woolwich High Street
Woolwich
London
SE18 6DN

Telephone - 020 8921 8139
email - licensing@greenwich.gov.uk

ref - The Ship, 205 Plumstead Common Road, SE18 2UJ

83 comments:

Anonymous said...

Thanks for raising attention to this on your site.
I do rather like your idea of an electric fence! but all the other proposals spell sleepless nights and an increase in ASB.
I think we could be facing real problems here. I am concerned people will not write and protest this time, and that this might 'slip through'. Like you I urge everyone to write to their counsellors, write to the licensing committee and write to their mp ........

Please, everyone put pen to paper,,,,,,,

Plumstead said...

actually, what I meant to say just then was that I 'urge everyone to write to their councilors' not counsellors as written above Opps!

Anonymous said...

are the wernbrook residents working together and putting a petition together again??
we MUST all act to stop this. this kind of venue is totally inapproprate for a residential area, esp one that has seen a significant change in demographic, which many many more young professional, some with young families.

To Mr Busta-The-Ship, if you want to run a noisy club, go to woolwich or some other town centre. not a residentical area. if you had any business sense you would capitalise on the urgent call by local residents (who actually have money to spend) for a gastro pub and/or cafe with a warmer cosier (and possible even classier) atmosphere. not a cheap and unwelcoming looking place selling cheap booze and attracting cheap clientele. here's some advice: bust your way out of plumstead and go somewhere else!!

Anonymous said...

below is what is on the Greenwich Licensing website...Also Don Austen one of the local Councillors is on the licensing sub committees. I have emailed him...!

The Ship, 205 Plumstead Common
Road, London, SE18 2UJ
Variation See Below See Below 18th September 2009
The applicant wishes to amend the plan of the premises and extend the licensable area to include the forecourt outside the premises. (Please
see attached a copy of the proposed plan). The applicant also wishes to extend the hours for the following licensable activities permitted on
the licence as follows –
• Sale and Supply of Alcohol
Mondays to Thursdays from 11.00hrs until 2300hrs
Fridays & Saturdays from 11.00hrs to 01.45hrs
Sundays from 12.00hrs to 22.45hrs
• Recorded Music
• Provision of Facilities for Dancing
Sundays to Thursdays from 18.00hrs until 22.45hrs
Fridays to Saturdays from18.00hrs until 01.45hrs
• Provision of Late Night Refreshment
Fridays & Saturdays from 2300hrs to 0145hrs.
The premises are currently licensed for the Sale of Alcohol on Mondays to Thursdays from 11.00hrs until 23.00hrs, Fridays and Saturdays
12.00hrs until 23.45hrs and Sundays from 12.00hrs until 22.45hrs. Recorded Music & The Provision of Facilities for Dancing on Sundays to
Thursdays from18.00hrs until 22.45hrs and Fridays and Saturdays from18.00hrs until 23.45hrs Bank and Public Holidays from12.00hrs until
23.45hrs. Late Night Refreshment on Fridays & Saturdays from 23.00hrs to until 23.45hrs.

Plumstead said...

Hi
Greenwich Council have just emailed me the full application / schedule. If any one wants a copy email me on
plumsteadcommon@googlemail.com,

Anonymous said...

I was at Woolwich Town Hall when Busta originally submitted plans to re-open The Shi*. The number of residents who objected at the time was fantastic, and it is so important that people do the same again now.

Anonymous said...

does he have his planning application listed on display outside the Pub? i thought you had to do this to let the public know your plans..only i havent seen anything in running the gauntlet past there

Doctor Pangloss said...

I'm pretty sure the planning notice must be displayed outside the property in question. Surely The Ship's owners wouldn't be so underhanded as to remove the notice? If the notice has 'fallen off' (a lamp post), would they need to reapply?

RightOnTheCommon said...

I've just had something posted through my door, literally in the last 20 mins, and this is the first I've heard of it! Considering I live not a stones throw from the place, I feel they are trying to get this through without public knowledge!

We are often awoken by fighting (a huge fight out on the common last weekend), or shouting/swearing and general noise on the weekend, so would be even more delightful for it to be later..NOT.

Our car on 2 weekends had the entire length scratched, obviously can't be sure it was a Ship client but it wouldn't surprise me.

I just knew he would try and change the licence once he had been there a while.

How do we know which Ward we belong to? Who do I send a letter to?

Plumstead said...

if you want to find your local councilor try cut and paste on this address, and it will allow you to search by postcode

http://www.greenwich.gov.uk/Greenwich/YourCouncil/YourRepresentatives/Councillors/


I am not sure what the council have just delivered to you, I have just had a bit of paper put through the door saying about making representations to your Councilor. I rang the council yesterday because the councilors they had listed on the original letter did not relate to either of the local wards.

If you did not receive the original letter about the variation and you would like a copy of this, or the full operating schedule then you can email me on Plumsteadcommon@googlemail.com and I will send them to you. You can also contact the council licensing team on 0208 921 8090.

It will help you to have these application details, because as you probably know letters of objection need to be written in such a way so as to relate to the 4 licensing objectives.


If any one wants to exchange ideas about the content of letters etc then let me know.

Anonymous said...

Can anyone who actually knows for certain, what we can reject to ? i mean can you object to all four things in one letter or is it one item per letter ? can more than one person from the same address write a letter? does anyone have a template letter or a link to one ?
Is there any intention to hold a meeting regarding this issue and finally has anyone organised any news coverage ??

Anonymous said...

When i say news i dont mean the news at ten more like a local rag ???

Anonymous said...

I live and run a business in the local area. I have 3 young children, 2 attend Plumstead Manor Girls School. With regards to the original application around 3 years ago, I did have many concerns, which I have to say were because of the reputation gained prior to the pub closure.

I have to say that many of my concerns were unfounded and in my view the application should be allowed. The extended opening may be an issue which I believe should be addressed by the appropriate authorities (don't forget they too have to review the application). I don't think outside drinking is a problem, I would love to enjoy a pint and a read of the newspaper outside in nice weather. No other public house in the immediate area really offers a clean environment without the undesirables.

I understand that any proposed building of a screen will be subject to a separate review.

My view is that we should really be looking at the number of licences granted to retail outlets around Plumstead Common. Do we really need 8 ?!?!? Without a shadow of a doubt, this will have a significant contribution to ASB.

I really think this issue has been blown out of proportion and resentments which have been carried for many years need to be buried. Instead we should focus our attention on the real issues around the Common.

Anonymous said...

go won't be able to enjoy an idyllic quiet pint in the sunshine looking across the common on the basis of these plans. have a thorough look at the proposal, including the sketches of proposed outside area. anyone that has kids, esp young women attending to plumstead manor, should be alarmed by an under 18 drinking den/club promoting club/dance events located in the middle of a residentail area would be stupid not to be alarmed by the proposals. sorry anonymous above, but have you really thought this through, or are you one of the types that likes a noise club full of drunks at the end of your road.

Anonymous said...

I think the reason the Ship has not caused too many problems is precisely because with the previous application local residents wrote to the licensing committee, their mps and their local councilors and prompted the licensing committee to put appropriate restrictions in place e.g. The Ship was not allowed to open into the early hours, and dancing was permitted, but only once a month, thus preventing it from becoming a 'night club' type venue. The applicant wants to overturn the 'safeguards' previously agreed and I personally feel this will result in problems w if we do not take the time to write our letters of objection and persuade the licensing committee that the safeguards previously put in place are still appropriate to the residential location of this establishment.
I spoke to a councilor the other day who has said that by far the most influential thing is for local people to write letters of objection based around the licensing objectives. I am sure it would also assist if the PCEG and other local groups of standing would consider writing letters objecting to the current application.

Anonymous said...

hear hear!

Anonymous said...

Does anyone know who we have to write to to object to the Ship? I cannot find anything on the Greenwich Council website despite searching several times, if anyone knows who we need to complain to, please advise, I fear that people will not write in to object if its too much hassle to obtain the information
cheers

Anonymous said...

Write to:

Trading Standards & Licensing
Community Safety & Integrated Enforcement
Riverside House
Woolwich High Street
Woolwich
London SE18 6DN

Or Email:
licensing@greenwich.gov.uk

In order for your representation to be valid the letter needs to:

- Mention issues that relate to one or more of the 4 licensing objectives - protection of children from harm (such as sales of alcohol to children), public safety (such as fire escapes being blocked), prevention of public nuisance (such as excessive noise) or prevention of crime and disorder;
- Say in precisely what way you consider that the premises are contravening or might contravene the licensing objective concerned;
- Relate specifically to the premises concerned;
- Contain your name and address (which you can ask to be kept confidential)

Letters/emails are due in by September 18. We encourage you to write/email.

Since "things aren't too bad" let's try and keep it that way and help keep the area from becoming the next downtown Bexleyheath on a Friday/Saturday night.

Thanks.

Anonymous said...

I quite enjoy the regular Saturday night drunken altercations that spill down my street.....i shall be writing a letter.

On a positive note, has anybody noticed that Plumstead is about to get a Tesco? I kid you not. The site of the old Lakedale Road COOP is currently being renovated into a Metro/Express, open 6am-11pm Mon-Sun.

I know some people hate the company, but surely better to fill that site with something, rather than see the shutters down for months.....

Anonymous said...

In response to "I live and run a business in the local area"
I cannot believe what you have written, for someone who has lived in Plumstead for so long surely you would know about the beer garden in the front and the back of the Old Mill or even the one in the Star, this is not being kicked out of all proprtion, the owner of the Ship doesent have to live on Plumstead Common Road, bearing in mind the goverments new laws on alcohol sales and the tacky cheap advertising to be found promoting the Ship, and considering the drug culture that is already beging to take hold in the Ship, i am surprised you have such liberal views, how would the owner feel if we opened a club (and a cheap one at that) oustside his house on Griffin Road, also the local council didnt hang around on putting a compulsory purchase order on the Prince Albert when it suited them so lets see what happens here

Anonymous said...

Hmmm i wonder if the person who "runs a business in the local area" owns a pub or a news agents

Anonymous said...

Sorry here i go again, surely with Plumstead Manor expansion aimed at increasing its "6th form college", thus increasing the number of 16/17/ 18 year olds coming to the area this cannot be a good thing, i mean why not just offer free wi-fi and a student discount outside as well.

Anonymous said...

Dr P.. The planning notice is posted in one of the windows of the ship. I spotted it from a distance. One can only actually read what is printed on it if you advance into the forecourt up to the window. I suspect few are brave enough to do that, unless you are amongst the surly-looking smoking drinking blokes, often with scare dog, standing outside the place.

Anonymous said...

We would be very happy to spend our hard-earned disposable income in a decent local restaurant/cafe, (wine bar on the common!!), that offers a choice of a few decent wines and perhaps even a tasty meal. There are too many pubs around here and nothing at all for people who don't like the pub scene. How about mixing things up a bit, and someone trying to make some money off those of us with a little bit of extra cash and tastes that extend beyond alcopops, pints of lager and fast food. really, there must be a sensible entrepeneur out there who wants to cash in on the (aspiring) middle classes of plumstheadshire.

Doctor Pangloss said...

I'd imagine these planning notices have to be visible to the general public from the public highway. If the notice cannot be read from the public highway, isn't the Ship's owner/applicant contravening the public notice process?

This is a minor gripe but underlines how (I personally feel), low and devious the owner is in trying to sneak this application through. If he gets his wishes this time then what next? Sunday afternoon dog fighting? Betting allowed of course.

Anonymous said...

There is a PCEG meeting this Sunday 13/9. Anyone concerned about this matter that wants to discuss should come to the meeting!!

Meeting details:
Sunday 13 Sept. 3pm
St Marks Church Hall on Old Mill Road.

Agenda on the website:
http://pceg.org.uk/notice.htm

Be there. Together we can protect our Common, our neighbourbood and our community.

Anonymous said...

I can't make Sunday or would def have come. The anon poster with children at PM School needs their head examining. Plumstead is becoming much more gentrified (bring on Tesco) and the lovely new Cafe on Lakedale is just the type of thing the Common needs. It doesnt need (in my opinion of course) a bloody crappy shit hole of a pub that is The Ship. The concrete forecourt is not a beer garden and the people that hang around smoking outside are a bunch of filty, football shirt wearing chavs.
Dancing?! What, around a pole?
I'd like to demolish the building - have never seen so many adverts promoting cheap alcopops to the unemployed masses.
It's a dump and it would have made a lovely gastropub.

Anonymous said...

Mad Ship loving poster - what are the real issues surrounding the Common that you are referring to?

Anonymous said...

The Ship must be SUNK!!

Anonymous said...

anyone know of a pub around the common where I can catch the football on sunday?

Doctor Pangloss said...

Yes, there's a bijou little establishment called The Ship. It does show sport, but you'd never know as it's quite low-key, so you might not be able to find it.

Anonymous said...

Were you aware that the ship also caters for weddings? Now pause for a minute and hold that thought.

How do you suppose that side of the business is going?

Doctor Pangloss said...

Anonymous, your wedding post is hilarious. Thanks for brightening up my day.

Maybe it was a typo, perhaps it caters for PEDDLING?

Anonymous said...

priceless, shotgun weddings i should think..

Anonymous said...

Wedding parties you prick ...

Plummy Mummy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
digit_master said...

"Is the person who runs a business in Plumstead by any chance the owner of the Ship?".

I'm afraid not. I am a neutral and I have absolutely no connection with any public house other than using them to socialise and relax. I am actually a caucasian (I am starting to think this actually matters) male, 48, 6' 1" tall, proud husband, proud father of 3 beautiful children and a very successful chartered accountant.

I really am disgusted with what I am reading. Some comments, such as stating the owners name and house location are irresponsible. Others are slanderous and could amount to deformation of character. My guess is nearly all objections/claims made on this blog are unsubstantiated.

Jealousy, resentment and dare I say it, racism is what I detect when reading and hearing people's comments about this application.

I am astounded that those who oppose this application think that The Ship has no genuine local support, infact quite the opposite.

Please do not insult my intellgence and ask if I have actually read the application. I HAVE THOROUGHLY. Those who have suggested I haven't, clearly need to go to Specsavers. I am also starting to think that you are the sort of people who need to be turfed out from Plumstead Common and contribute to the 'stale' atomosphere of Plumstead Common , not to mention zero business sense.

I look forward to your inadequate responses.

Plummy Mummy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Plummy Mummy said...

I've removed some comments that I made earlier to this post as they had caused offence which wasn't my intention. I have a certain sense of humour that sometimes rankles but it's very very unintentional.

Anonymous said...

Surely the issue here simple. The Question is - Is the Ship in the right location for the quiet operation and dispersal of the type of venue that is being proposed. Is the Ship made of a structure that can be sufficently soundproofed to accommodate dancing and drinking to the early hours of the morning without disturbing the many residents that live near by. I, and many of my neighbours believe the answer to this is No. I and my immediate neighbours come from the full range of diverse social, cultural,and ethnic communities that I am very pleased to say make up this neighbourhood. The Equal opps issue as far as I am concerned is will I, and my neigbhours have the same opportunity as we presently have to have quiet and peaceful enjoyment of our homes, and uninterupted sleep, if the pub is allowed to be a daily drinking and dancing venue which stays open into the the early hours every weekend. I dont believe so, and that is why I am objecting, and not for any other reason or motivation.

Digit_Master said...

Fair point if the proposal is that the The Ship is turned into a club type venue, which it isn't. When I studied the

application and the drawings, I did speak directly with the landlord about his intentions. With regards to dancing, his

intention is to have a very small area allocated as a dance area. The area is smaller than the area of my front room, so

please don't worry if you think the idea is to turn 'The Ship' into Plumstead's very own 'Ministry of Sound'. I did ask him

about and spoke with friends who also use the PUB, yes that's right, a PUB, a pub which is a landmark site and I believe

has been a public house has been on this Common for many years pre-current ownership and I have been reliably informed that

it wasn't the best run public house (that was him being polite) and the situation was far far worse and does not compare to

the present day. The only critisim I have of the application is that it is not descriptive enough, therefore leaving the

application open to interpretation. In my view (and many others), there is nothing underhanded about the application. You

don't need to go on the forecourt to read the notice because there is another copy on the left of the building alongside

Plumstead Common Road.

When you get past the unique haircut and gold teeth, you will find the landlord is very approachable and willing to listen. I did exactly that and guess what ?? The 5 minute conversation I'd hoped for turned into approx. 2 hour constructive session (pleasantly surprised as I did not see that coming and the wife gave me an earfull as I was only meant to be out to get the Standard !!). I do have concerns around the late night and under 18's, but they are just that concern's. If he can make it work (I think he has a good chance) then great, I feel it will be a big plus for the area. If there is any danger the concerns highlighted are about to be realised, then the responsible authorities have the power to review or revoke conditions or the entire licence with immediate effect.

With regards to the proposed outside area ..... where is there ANY REFERENCE to a BEER GARDEN in the application or

drawings ? I think you will find none and 'Outside Area' and 'Forecourt' are the words used which relate to the other proposal in the application.

Digit_Master said...

To the person who says my head needs examining, I will fire that comment right back at you. Your head needs examining and

get your eyes seen to as well. Right next to Plumstead Manor School is The Old Mill. Believe it or not it sells alcohol and

has done for many years to another bunch of filty, football shirt wearing chavs. Not long ago there was another pub called

the Prince Albert. Do I even need to go there ? I don't think so. The Who'd Thought It has had a very chequered history. A

stone's throw away from that public house are 2, yes 2 primary schools and don't forget a children's playground.

Cheap drinking? Why are you surprised? We are in a worldwide recession which will take another 2 years to fully recover

from. I'd like to see you take on the likes of JD Wetherspoon, all the major supermarket chains, not to mention every

single Off Licence. Every business I know has a sale of some sort, why 'The Ship' should be the exception I don't know.

The drawings state the 1.9metre high screen and move of entrance is an option if required by the local authority as a

compromise to protect the immediate area from any litter, children loitering on the forecourt etc. The entire area is

covered by CCTV and the pub is already adequately staffed to supervise the forecourt. Name another pub in the area which

can say the same ? I'm not sure you can.

Finally, again to the person who needs their head and eyes examining, the pub is not a 'shithole'. It is very clean and the

only other pub I now drink in is The Star which is a different type of pub and very pleasant, but still not without it's

problems. I have on half a dozen occasions witnessed drug dealing on the premises and smokers taking drinks out onto the street. Any objections to that ? I do not drink in The Old Mill because it is what you call a shithole. Has needed for many years, a thorough clean. Also nto very well stocked. When I used to drink there the landlord always seemed worse for wear whilst serving. The main reason I don't drink there any more is because of the KIDS who often managed to take their own booze into the rear garden, drink it, be a nuisance and not get barred. All of this happening in front of the staff working there !! Also, known associates of our very own resident gangster Mr Courtney enforcing his presence on the community .... have you done any thing about his castle ? I bet if he built a moat around it you would still do nothing about it. The drug dealing you say is begging to take hold of The Ship should remain just that if the landlord continues to run his business responsibly. They will remain actively 'trading' in and around the 'Who'd Thought It' (in a residential area with 2 primary schools and a childrens playground within a stones throw), The Alma etc until they decide to do something about it.

Gastropub in Plumstead would never work as a viable business and would not last 5 seconds. Don't ask me why as I don't want to waste my time explaining. All I will say is Gordon Ramsay Holdings is one of my clients and he is struggling with his gastropub chain in some of the most affluent areas of London. You want to have a go ? Here is an idea for you guys .... form a co-operative, buy The Woodman site and see if you can make it work, otherwise put up, shut up and let other people get on with their life's.

I hope this posting goes some way into balancing the views on this blog which was previously very biased and one-sided. Expect other resident's to be posting balanced views over the next few days. We all should be working with the responsible authorities and just as importantly the local businesses (yes that includes The Ship) who provides services and employ local people.

My response posts in future should be alot shorter (I hope !).

Anonymous said...

Doctor Pangloss , open your eyes planning notice is displayed outside the property in question , look before posting things here
People like you, make places like the ship , feel negative.Laughing at a typing error, where it is a wedding party to a wedding venue,is not funny at all.

Anonymous said...

To this comment
(Hmmm i wonder if the person who "runs a business in the local area" owns a pub or a news agents).

Is this person for real, you rasist Anonymous so and so.
you are the type of people who don't like outsiders suceeding.

Anonymous said...

To start caling people racist is not on and a really shallow thing to say, its nothing to do with anyones colour or beliefs, it is just the area where the Ship is situated, does anyone truly believe its fair for people who live in the surrounding area,of which i am one, im really brassed of that someone has had the balls to use the racist argument, your bang out of order.
Oh and in response to the "accountant", so you have managed to slate every pub in the area apart from the Ship, did you get free drinks included in your two hour session and did you remember to leave your business card. I feel this blog is in danger of forgetting the real issue, as you have already said we have a few Pubs that are in need of some tlc, they are all in a deprived area with several schools so what makes you honestly believe we need another one, especially in a residential area.
We are all grown adults or supposed to be i dont think we need the swearing or the abuse on either side of the argumenet.

Anonymous said...

"Is this person for real, you rasist Anonymous so and so.
you are the type of people who don't like outsiders suceeding".

Can you explain why the guy who owns the Ship and has lived in the area for a long long long time is an "outsider" as you put it

Yes i have met the guy too and yes he seems pleasant, but i will still be protesting agaisnt this new license being approved.

Digit_Master said...

I am not slating every pub in the area. I am simply stating the facts which can, if need be substantiated with very little effort. Please don't forget that The Ship isn't a new pub. It has been there for many years, was shut down, used as a dump site and I was told at one point was occupied by squatters. I don't need to look for free drinks as I am more than capable of buying them myself. Again, was that comment needed? I think not. What is bang out of order is the biased views of the blog prior to my arrival and I would also like to add that if you take the time to read it from the opening comment, many are shallow and unsubstantiated responses. By implying that I am favouring this application in the hope of gaining new business is quiet simply ridiculous. Another deviation and personal attack with zero focus on the subject of the debate. Not that it is any of business, I don't need to fish for work. I am always approached and don't work with small fry anymore. You have contributed to the nonsense. I agree we are all grown adults and we don't need deviation away from the subject, personal attacks, swearing or the abuse on either side of the argument .... just make sure you set the standard before you start preaching to others.

Doctor Pangloss said...

Welcome to Question Time.

It's been a busy day in Plumsteadshire hasn't it.

Digit Master, thank you very much for firing your views across our bows. I do agree with you on many points and welcome your argument to redress some sort of balance on 'Shipgate'. However, if you want unbiased views from me or the people who care to comment on a blog, then I think you'll find there won't be such a blog. Freedom of speech is the key and if most of my lovely listeners have a gripe against The Ship then that's the way it is. I'm glad that you've stood up for The Ship. I would like more comments from the pro-Ship brigade, but hey, looks like you are a minority (before you say anything, that was not an allusion to racism).

The Ship has alienated alot of people's backs up and it shows. The reasons are up to the individual, but The Ship has got a very, very, very long way to go to win us over. Before you ask, my main gripe is down to aesthetics darling. I think the building is strong enough to hold its' own in a 'conservation area', but it's been butchered and then plastered over with tacky advertising banners which sends out all the wrong messages. I know this isn't a point for opposition, but like I said, this is my main gripe.

Anonymous said...

Unbiased views are the fair, analytical description of all relevant sides of a debate, something that this debate is obviously lacking.

Restrictions on the freedom of speech include laws regulating libel as well as slander.

If you truly believe in freedom of speech that means you're also in favour of freedom of speech precisely for the views that you disagree with.

'The Ship has got a very, very, very long way to go to win us over.' In reality does a business need your approval?

'but it's been butchered and then plastered over with tacky advertising banners which sends out all the wrong messages. I know this isn't a point for opposition, but like I said, this is my main gripe.' Has it crossed your mind that each and every individual has their own idea of what is acceptable in terms of advertisement and or decoration?

Surely what one person finds acceptable the next may not.
I personally do not find most of the retail units in Woolwich and Plumstead to be of a high standard when it comes to aesthetics however, as I have stated, my views are entirely different to others.

I must say that I find Digit Masters comments refreshing amongst all the negativity.

Doctor Pangloss said...

Oh well, you can't please all the people all of the time.

Anonymous said...

Firstly to Digimaster, no one really cares how much you earn or how well your business is doing, if your home was in direct view of the Ship and could possibly lower its value or appeal im sure you wouldnt be so pro Ship. And to the anonymous comment "I personally do not find most of the retail units in Woolwich and Plumstead to be of a high standard " i couldnt agree more but these are not surrounded by a residential conservation area and several schools.

Anonymous said...

Digimaster you also have unsubstantiated views with regards to the other pubs in the area, you have completley contradicted yourself with your statement, forget about trying to impress us with your literary genius and actually read your comments before you post them, if the blog was biased before you came along, then you have deffinateley swung the biasometer in the complete opposite direction

Anonymous said...

Just read the numptys comments above, whats wrong with all of use plumsteads a shithole always has been and always will be its the ass hole of south london all the boozers here are the same the crack den Ship en all

Digit_Master said...

"Firstly to Digimaster, no one really cares how much you earn or how well your business is doing, if your home was in direct view of the Ship and could possibly lower its value or appeal im sure you wouldnt be so pro Ship."

To anon who wrote the above, I'm so sorry ... let's get The Ship closed down occupied with squatters and have it turned into an illegal tip site. That should raise the value and appeal of the houses facing it :-)

weloveplumstead said...

Let's all calm down and try to find a middle ground.
Isn't the main point here that ALL the things that Mr Ship is asking for this time around are exactly those things that were vehemently opposed a few years ago and he didn't get? Answer, YES.
It is fine for The Ship stays as it is (even if not kind of venue all of would like to patronise). It hasn't become the horrid place of previous years and incarnations. And it is certainly better than the derelict building that stood there before. All that is great.
HOWEVER, Mr Ship seems to have completely forgotten (or doesn't care) that a few years ago there was a record turn out in opposition against the very items he is now asking for again.
If he wants a nightclub (which is what is being proposed here -albeit with a small dance area - due to the very loose wording), then he should open that kind of premises in a suitable non-residential area. Not on the corner of a residential street, in a building located within a conservation area.
The residents on Wernbrook, St John's, etc in the immediate vicinity will most certainly experience more late night noise, and it is unfair that those people's quality of life will be compromised because an venue unsuitable for a residential area is openned.
I do think that Mr Accountant would have a different view if he lived next door, and also if he were full aware of the situation a few years ago, when Mr Ship attempted to open a club called Busta Rhymes at The Ship premises. (I believe you'll be able to find discussion of that matter within the archive on this blog.)
Another point I'll make is also a signification one, and that is the responsiblity to consider the well being of young people in the local community when license applications are granted. Opening the place all day to people who are acutally underage is totally irresponsible, esp at a time when we are increasingly aware (via NHS and other reports/research) of alcohol abuse rising in young people. There is already a problem of underage drinking (even within The Ship itself!) and illegal drug taking and dealing(around the common). The applicant must fail to recognise the potential risk to young people on the point of drinking, if he is proposing a venue open to the young and underaged, particularly since The Ship seems to be focused on a market that wants cheap drink (see plethora of signage advertising said cheap drinks outside the venue). A cynical person might think he is trying to capitalise on this market.
There is NO racist issue here. It is true, Mr Ship seems to be a nice guy if you chat to him. However, he really doesn't understand his local population (and potential clientele). If he did he probably wouldn't be suffering during this particularly difficult financial time.
So let's stop the mudslinging at each other, and think rationally. Of course The Ship should stay, but it should NOT be granted a vaguely-worded license which would enable it to become the nightclub that was first invisaged a few years ago.
Sorry Mr Ship, but that's the facts. Many of us would be very VERY happy if you actually provided a venue we would like to go in to and patronise regularly. As you'll remember a few years ago, several of us were very hopeful of this a few years ago, and this never materialised.

PS: The license application was not initially posted on the PCR side of the building. Now it is. It was only in the front, behind the forecourt wall. It is NOT posted on the Wernbrook side (the side of The Ship's immediate residential neighbours!)

Anonymous said...

I can't believe people get so angry about being able to hold an "opinion". I don't think for one minute that The Ship should be granted any changes to its existing operating hours, and in my opinion it is a shithole. It looks exactly like a working class hovel.
Yes, I do think that a gastropub would work in Plumstead. I'm not talking about a Gordon Ramsay-esque pub but look at the Princess of Wales and the Railway in Blackheath. Both still have an old fashion look, are patronised by a range of locals (black, white, old, young, male, female, middle class, working class) and they work. They offer somewhere comfortable to drink in a non-pretentious atmosphere with beer and wine available and food and it is just what Plumstead needs.
If you don't believe that it would be popular then perhaps you don't have friends that would frequent such a place but that does not mean that we don't exist.
I also think that it must have been a while since you visited the Old Mill. Yes it does have filthy curtains, but it is friendly, does not have underage drinking in there and I have never seen anyone in there in a nylon football top. The Star is also a nice pub. What Plumstead does have is no variety. All existing pubs are spit and sawdust pubs full of unsavoury types (not full, but you get the drift). None of them offer food in the evening, or papers and a sofa or a wine list or a pleasant interior (The Woodman had a great interior, what a shame they didnt make more of the pub).
The fact that a number of people on here are supportive of a new venture, somewhere more civilised and oppose The Ship is proof that such feelings do exist.
It is not racist, far from it. The majority of people I see hanging around outside The Ship are white and look like they drive vans.

Anonymous said...

Yet again Digi Master you have failed to see the point i was making yes you are right we dont want a derelict builidng with unsavouries im completley happy for the Ship to remain as it is, i do totally agree with Weloveplumstead, there is no need for a nightclub (not even a small scale one) in a residential conservation area, i am astounded you cant see why people are protesting, no one wants the Ship to close down, however by alienating the local residents it will only be a matter of time before the business fails, its a fact you need your local community to survive, isnt it ?

Anonymous said...

Can't say the plans for The Ship bother me as much as the increase of ginger people in the area. Couldn't we refocus our efforts to rid ourselves of these "Red Perils" once and for all? What say you good doctor? Could you not prescribe some genetic altering drug to alleviate this ugly blight on The Shire??

Anonymous said...

Dr P. Your countdown ticker doesn't show up in internet explorer. So just to remind everyone....

Letters to the council regarding The Ship’s licence application need to be received by the Council by
THIS FRIDAY - 18 SEPT 2009.

In order for your representations/objections to be considered valid, you need to address one or more of the following issues:

- protection of children from harm
- public safety
- prevention of public nuisance
- prevention of crime and disorder

The licensing committee are obligated to safeguard these objectives.

Send your letters and petitions to:

Trading Standards & Licensing
Community Safety & Integrated Enforcement
Riverside House
Woolwich High Street
Woolwich
London SE18 6DN

Or Email:
licensing@greenwich.gov.uk

The meeting at which the application and any representations/objections are to be considered is still to be scheduled. Please keep your eyes and ears open for the date and make sure you COME ALONG if you can.

Back in 2006, there was a record turnout of the local community (along with legal counsel!) at the meeting, which accompanied a phenomenal collective response of the local community objecting to the SAME items that the Ship owner is now requesting AGAIN.
Please, let's all make sure we do the same again, otherwise, all the efforts of 2006, and now, will have been in vain.

Let's not let The Ship a scar our beautiful common, and disrupt our quiet neighbourhood and peaceful local community.

Please don’t be complacent, and write your letter now!!

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Wedding parties you prick ...

Friday, September 11, 2009 4:09:00 PM


sorry...my mistake!

Were you aware that the ship also caters for wedding parties? Now pause for a minute and hold that thought.

How do you suppose that side of the business is going?

I think I may have just pissed myself.

Anonymous said...

still makes me laugh. I didn't think Chavs got married, just had shit loads of kids and drank bacardi breezers

Anonymous said...

Never before have so many people with so little to say said so much to so few.

Anonymous said...

where do you think they cut the cake?

Anonymous said...

At your mum's house !!

James H said...

Oh really. If you buy or rent a house next to a pub, what do you expect?

At least there'll be somewhere to go until after hours and they won't ID bloody everyone if they just want a Diet Coke.

Get with it. It's 2009.

Anonymous said...

I should think when many people bought their houses around The Ship that it was either a) derelict or b) not a late night disco with glowing blue lights through the window.
I'm not sure how stupid/sensitive/blinkered most people are reading this blog but people are not objecting to pubs, indeed most of us would like a decent one, What people don't want is a nightclub on the common attracting people hanging around post midnight, getting hammered and making a noise. There are ample available places in Woolwich, Greenwich and Blackeath and even Chislehurst for late night venues but a pub backing onto a residential street is not the ideal venue.

Digit_Master said...

What the hell are you guys on ? I mean don't you have anything better to do than make mountains out of molehills ? I honestly cannot believe the huge assumptions being made about this proposal. The idea that The Ship is going to be turned into a nightclub is ludicrous. I would be the first person to do something about it if that was the case. The 24 hour drinking laws which do exist, applicable up and down the country, doesn't mean that everyone applying for extended hours is going to automatically turn it into a nightclub. For those people who live within a stones throw, you all bought/rented property next to a PUB. Yes it was derelict but for how long ? 4-5 years ? It has always been a pub/strip joint/biker gang/drug dealers hangout before it was derelict and the situation has got far better for you under new ownership. Stop your whinging and moaning. Most bars, clubs in Blackheath, Greenwich, Woolwich are in residential areas or back onto residential streets. Stick to the facts and you will find the situation is no where near as bad as you all are making it out to be !!

Anonymous said...

No one is "whinging", before the rennovation of the Ship it was always a pub, a very bad one at that, now the new owner wants to extend his licensing hours, his intentions if his application is granted would point towards, later opening hours, younger crowds and an establishment that does not close at the same time as the other pubs around the common. Your right Digi that Bleackheath/Greenwhich and other areas have this type of establishment in residential areas which is exactly why i didnt move there, i moved here because i liked what surrounded me, ive said before i have no issues with the Ship as it is, i cant believe your suggesting that just because the Ship is applying for a late license that he might not even utilise it, would you suggest we all just withdraw objections and trust his good will, also another point to consider if you dont object now and the application is approved do you seriously believe you will ever get anything changed. I take it that you are fully aware of the huge campaign Plumstead Manor is mounting, and the PCEG, ive heard they have had over 200 individual letters of objections, and two petitions, one with aparrentley over 200 signatures, i think this application is almost dead in the water, id advise your friend to save his money and forget about it it
shame though

Digit_Master said...

I'm afraid what the actual facts are and what you hear are two completely different things. Plumstead Manor have always had The Old Mill and the Prince Albert for many years on their doorstep and have not been to concerned about what went on in their own pubs. They should also be concerned about what happens in their own 6th form. I know that over the years students have hid drinks and drugs in their lockers !! Shut the fuck up bitch and get on with your sad pathetic life !!

And before I forget. this is going out to the PCEG, you clearly need to do a better job cleaning that fucking pond ..... what a toilet !!

Anonymous said...

Digi Master, what a cock you are

Digit_Master said...

Your mum's a cock. Get it right ..... it's Digit Master not Digi Master you spunkbubble !!

Anonymous said...

i tell you what pal leave your mobile no. here and ill give ya a bell and we will see whos a bitch,ur a prick mate and any time you are ready i'll come and discuss this with ya further

Anonymous said...

Ooh threatening a local volunteer based group who all work locally in their own time, and for free, if you are the typical clientele of the Ship then you have just alienated your landlords local residents,in a massive way, next you will be issuing threats accountant my arse, grow up mate

Anonymous said...

I tell ya what Digi whatever your called, id rather drink the water out of the the pond than drink with you ya pleb

Doctor Pangloss said...

OK children, break it up or I'll send a letter home to your parents. I can do without a virtual bundle in my playground.

Let's just shake hands and agree to disagree. Digit_Master, you have put your point across and believe it or not, I think you have many valid points, but you and anon have taken this spat into new realms.

People. Digit_Master is allowed his/her say and has put intelligent viewpoints to us. We might not have agreed with these points but that's life. Let's move on.

I don't want you to force me into switching comments off, but these personal petty snipes are too risky for me to allow and I want this blog to remain open for you.

Think about it.

Digit_Master said...

Have you ever thought of the possibilty of someone spoofing someone's ID ? This is what has happened and I did not write those crude responses (Saturday, October 03, 2009 1:44:00 PM onwards). Obviously humoured someone. Never mind. One of the cons of this type of blog I'm afraid !!

Anonymous said...

if you dont like this type of blog, why do you a) use it and b) have an acccount that allows you to post on it?

Digit_Master said...

You do not need an account to give yourself an identity or use the blog and I didn't say I don't like to use the blog. You really do like making assumptions based on nothing ..... some people really don't have anything else worthwhile doing ....

Anonymous said...

Yes Digi, you said it. You really don't have anything else worthwhile doing do you.

Anonymous said...

losers

Anonymous said...

Lets petition for strippers in The Star

Anonymous said...

Oi oi ..... anyone been to the brothel on the bottom of Admaston Road ?

Anonymous said...

Digi. You know some pretty foul words for an accountant.