The Dulwich Estate is challenging Southwark Council’s recent designation of the pub as an Asset of Community Value. It has issued the following press statement which says:
The Dulwich Estate, via its retained property advisers, has asked Southwark Council to explain how the nomination to designate the Charity's property as an Asset of Community Value meets the criteria as specified in the Assets of Community Value (England) Regulations 2012. The Charity has raised this by way of a challenge in accordance with Section 10 of these Regulations in order to protect its position under planning legislation.
Notification from the Council that the nomination had been successful was received via email at 12.34 p.m. on Monday 2lst December. The Charity's representations (as set out in a 7 page letter) in response to the nomination had been submitted by its property advisers to the Council by email at12.27 p.m. on Friday the 18th December. Given this very short time frame, the Charity questions whether the Council had given due consideration to the representations and how the nomination fully meets the requirements under the Regulations.
The ACV Designation of the Half Moon Public House protects the use of the property as a public house only - it does not secure any part of the premises as a venue for live entertainment since this is ancillary to the primary use of property as a public house. The planning application by Fullers does not propose any change of use to the ground floor which will remain as a public house.
The Charity's objective remains to get the building refurbished in order for it to re-open as soon as possible. To this end, it is pleased to have reached the agreement with Fullers under which both parties will invest significant sums to restore and refurbish the building, providing hotel accommodation in addition to the public house and dining facilities, in order to ensure the viability of the Half Moon in the long-term. It is hoped that Fullers will be successful in achieving a planning approval with the support of the local community; should Fullers fail in this, it is at liberty to withdraw from the agreement with the Estate. The Charity would then be tasked with finding an alternative tenant willing to undertake refurbishment of the property.”
23 February 2016