The Bull - An Update

Mon 2 Mar 2015, 12:12

It is unclear why WODC has posted the information relevant to the ACV nomination as part of the documentation for the planning application. The freeholders have no right to object *before* the ACV nomination is considered, but they can request a review of the ACV nomination *after* the nomination is made.

That said, it is interesting to see it, though very similar to the comments from corporate pub owners I have recently seen in other places.

Mon 2 Mar 2015, 12:08

I think the thread has been opened to make people aware of new documents lodged & I agree totally with Mike Williams comments
In terms of usage and potential viability I believe the thread shows that many people either do not use the Bull or use it less than they would because they believe the pub/restaurants in other villages provide better value
This goes to the heart of the viability issue which is that similar businesses in the local area are thriving when the Bull is not for reasons outlined by many contributors

Mon 2 Mar 2015, 10:40 (last edited on Fri 6 Mar 2015, 10:42)

Mike Williams is quite right to point out the facts.

Sun 1 Mar 2015, 22:50

I would greatly appreciate it if contributors to this thread could "play the ball, not the man". Please try and keep your comments to the planning application. Thank you.

John, thanks for posting that update.

Sun 1 Mar 2015, 22:23

Mike, as this has subject has been re opened it was to see if support is being given , by the people that make the most noise. You only replied to half of my original question not the frequency of use.

Sun 1 Mar 2015, 21:59

Mark Yes I do. But what has that got to do with my message?

Sun 1 Mar 2015, 21:31

John , Mike, no apologies for asking, but do you use the Bull at all ? And if so how often ?

Sun 1 Mar 2015, 18:44

The planning application still uses at least three fallacious arguments:

1) Proof that the business is not currently viable is NOT proof that it cannot be viable - obviously.

2) The need for the owners to recoup their initial investment is irrelevant. I'm sorry for them if they have made a loss but that does not, of itself, justify a change in planning permission - obviously.

3) No attempt has been made to market the business as a going concern at least in part due to the potential "destabilising effect upon staff". I wonder which is more destabilising for the staff, sale as a going concern (still requiring staff) or application for residential redevelopment (no staff needed).

Hmmmm.

Sun 1 Mar 2015, 16:51

No apologies for re-opening the subject, but others may be interested in knowing that various additional documents have now been lodged with WODC by the owners and their planning agents.
publicaccess.westoxon.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=NGPYTDRKGCW00