| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Silence from the Putney Society re the Pergola application | |
| Posted by: | Michael Ixer | |
| Date/Time: | 14/02/19 18:39:00 |
| I'm sort of neutral on this, I live far enough away in East Putney not to be affected by this. I'm sure when I first moved to Putney in 1979 I'd have quite enjoyed a venue like this, these days it's unlikely to be a place I would frequent. (A couple of years ago I was in the Railway until circa 2pm celebrating a birthday but then suffered very badly for it ....) If I try and look at this objectively it is Putney Exchange's and Incipio's management's responsibility to maximise the return on shareholders' and other investors' capital. However, the more I see of this venture: misleadingly using the RHS's name without permission, reports from the way other venues are managed and the impact they have on the locality - the less suitable this seems for Putney. If Incipio make certain claims and Wandsworth grant planning permission/licences on the basis of those, if those claims subsequently are found to be incorrect then the licences should be revoked. That would not be in the investors' long term interests and hopefully the management would suffer accordingly. Also, if this venue turns out to be a major nuisance it will damage the reputation of both the Exchange and Blackrock, and may make the Putney Exchange an undesirable location for retail businesses if locals stop shopping their? If the new venue negatively affects other parts of its tenants' business, either through reputational damage or reduced parking, that isn't going to be of long term benefit to its owners. |