News

The Tumbledown Dick pub in Farnborough Road
advertisement

Report boosts battle to save Tumbledown Dick

By Tim Harris
January 14, 2013

THE campaign group battling to save an historic Farnborough pub has released a heritage report to underline the building’s worth.

A campaign started in autumn to save the Tumbledown Dick pub in Farnborough Road and a committee – the Friends of the Tumbledown Dick – has formed.

It emerged late last year that the pub, known as the Tumbly, had been linked with a sale to McDonald’s.

The campaign group hope the newly released heritage report will be their strongest weapon in the fight to save the venue.

It follows a report by an independent historic buildings expert, commissioned by Rushmoor Borough Council, which ruled the Tumbledown did not meet the criteria for listed building status.

Fundraising gig to help Tumbly campaign
Tumbledown Dick 'should not be listed'
McDonald's confirms plans for pub

The campaign group’s report read: “The Tumbledown Dick, hotel, public house and posting house and Hampshire treasure has existed since the 16th century.

"There are surviving records for the manorial courts for the Manor of Farnborough dating back to the 16th century.

"Aside from the paying of rents and coroners’ inquests, the Tumbledown Dick was a place for locals and visitors to celebrate and be entertained, from post-match meals for cricket teams to grand celebrations for royal events.

"From the 20th century into the 21st it was the focal place in Farnborough for musical expression and entertainment.”

The Tumbledown has hosted bands such as Reuben, Hundred Reasons and The Jam, and Fran Beauchamp, of the Friends of the Tumbledown Dick, said: “We felt it necessary to publish our own heritage assessment report findings.

“A huge amount of research has been undertaken in libraries, museums and online. The Farnborough Society requested the Tumbly be added to their proposed list of ‘Buildings of Local Importance’ but for some reason it never made it.”

Ms Beauchamp added: “We hope to obtain listing status after our own application to English Heritage, who are reviewing it. We want people to understand how important the Tumbledown Dick is to what is left in Farnborough.”

The campaigners, with more than 2,500 Facebook supporters, have been critical of the heritage assessment commissioned by the council and carried out by Turley Associates.

Andrew Lloyd, chief executive for the council, underlined how the authority must take a "clear and objective approach".

“I have read the campaign group’s report and it is very interesting,” he said.

“We have been happy to co-operate with the group, we have no hidden agenda. We respect their right to do what they are doing.

"We recognised they are putting a tremendous effort in. The decision is for English Heritage.

"We know the building is in a poor state. What is important is what happens in future – it has to be one that is able to be delivered and sustained.”

Ms Beauchamp added: “We wish to see off McDonald’s and have significant local support.”

The Tumbledown Dick has been empty since 2008, after it was closed following a failed health inspection.

| Submit Comments | View Comments (43)

« Previous Story | Next Story »

Most recent user comments 25 of 43

1 | 2 | Next Page Show 15 | 25 | 50 per page

Its just really strange how RBC has totally dismissed anything in the report by the awesome save the tumbledown group..

Craigo, Farnborough
14/03/2013 at 20:52

Which Council "altered" the TDD?

County Councillor John Wall - Farnborough South Division (@CllrJohnWall), Farnborough, Hampshire
26/01/2013 at 20:15

The trouble is that the council are to quick to alter any old building = many in Aldershot have changed or been taken down, it is a shame that this is happerning.

To quick to pull down or alter from what they were and it is a shame.

I cannot afford to go to cinema either - have you seen the cost to go?

Even at christmas wanted to take grandchildren to princes Hall for Panto and it was out of my price range, even with all this in the area their is no where to go that doesn't cost the earth.

PJA
22/01/2013 at 13:26

I'd be very interested to learn where I said that "the building is of no historic value" ? As I have said no such thing the statement should be retracted.

Similarly, I'm unaware of Rushmoor Borough Council saying that. Let's be very clear what Rushmoor did. They commissioned a specialist consultant to see whether the building met the English Heritage criteria for listing - and this concluded that it didn't.

My view, I hope, is clear - I'm not particularly enthusiastic about the golden arches appearing on the A325 as I don't think that this would bring people into the town centre and help develop an evening economy.

County Councillor John Wall - Farnborough South Division (@CllrJohnWall), Farnborough, Hampshire
20/01/2013 at 00:08

This really is a shameful story that is unfolding regarding this rather lovely building. I am constantly reading comments from Rushmoor Borough Councillors and now a County Councillor stating the building is of no historic value. What I am not seeing is any real evidence to verify this fact and that is just not good enough.

The Action Group have provided a very professional and well researched preliminary report, which gives great credibility to the claim that the majority of the structure portrayed in the watercolour by Thomas Rowlandson still exists. Yet this appears to have been summarily dismissed.

The historical value of the the building, to the people of Farnborough, should not be taken lightly and I am delighted that the English Heritage decision is to be challenged. Especially in light of the recent updating of their guidelines, which stress that local history should not be overlooked when making an assessment.

From what I have read and understood there has never been any serious investigation into this building at all. So what exactly are the councillors and English Heritage basing their judgement on? This really has to be dealt with properly; nothing less than a full scale, professiona,l examination will settle this matter. Certainly not one by a national company that specialises in destroying our heritage 'obstacles' and filling their place with soulless boxes.

As an aside, I happen to be an elderly resident Councillor Wall and having no small local businesses makes life very expensive and difficult. The elderly need places where they can be entertained and trust me when I say we cannot afford cinemas and restaurants. A community run venture in the Tumble Down D**k would provide a wonderful meeting place for coffee mornings.

What a silly word filter! :D

SmallSoo, Farnborough
19/01/2013 at 17:14

If protesting at Farnborough Gate, in spite of the chronic road congestion there, go by car. No horses permitted.

Retired of Aldershot, Aldershot
19/01/2013 at 15:41

Why not take the protest to their branch at Farnborough Gate.

UKR
19/01/2013 at 11:10

It's important to note that RBC is just the planning authority here. If McDonalds submit an application to erect the golden arches on the A325 they have to judge that on planning terms and taking into account the local plan. Having been on planning committees, and not liked it, I know some of the things they can, or can't, take into account. If they reject an application there could well be an appeal which, if lost, would have to be paid for by the Council Tax payer:-( RBC isn't the enemy here !

Getting the building, or part of it, listed wouldn't necessarily stop big macs on the Farnborough Road as there are plenty of listed buildings that have been converted for other uses. McDonalds almost certainly have the resources to deal with that sort of thing. A quick search found this:

http://www.britishlistedbuildings.co.uk/wa-3024-35-high-street-mcdonald-s-stow-hill

That's a Grade II building with the sign of the golden arches on it. I bet the building is better than the food!

Possibly the best solution is try and "frighten" McDonalds away before they get as far as a planning application. Public protests prevented a Costa Coffee in Totnes.

County Councillor John Wall - Farnborough South Division (@CllrJohnWall), Farnborough, Hampshire
18/01/2013 at 19:34

One day supporting music and arts, and listening to what the people actually want, will be flavour of the month again at Rushmoor. But of course by then Rushmoor will have helped destroy what little quality of life, and heritage, is left in Farnborough. Some of the facts in the council produced Turley report are wrong, please open your minds to this error RBC.

Louise Punchard
18/01/2013 at 12:18

And sorry to flood the comments but I feel I should add in the interest of balance that we are Appealing the decision made by English Heritage (see new news story in the next edition). We will be lodging an appeal with the Secretary of State for the Department for Culture, Media and Sport.

Our appeal will be based on substantive grounds with significant evidence that English Heritage have not included in their findings, they appear to have relied solely on the information supplied by Turley Associates, with no on-site visit or archaeological investigations.

The Tumbledown is a significant public house with a wealth of important historical connections that we are hoping will be protected on appeal. It is worth noting that English Heritage rarely list Public Houses due to the huge number of them and will only do so, in very special cases.

In any event, whatever the outcome, Friends of the Tumbledown will be fighting to save this historic building which has been present in Farnborough for centuries.

Franb, Farnborough
17/01/2013 at 23:13

One more point about the promised Vue cinema.. we have been sent an email from a member of our campaign who recently enquired about what is happening with Vue and they sent this reply: Dear

Thank you for your email.

Please be advised that at present we do not have any confirmation of this cinema.

Vue Cinemas

Why are Vue saying they have no confirmation of this cinema if work is to start imminently? Is there a miscommunication somewhere?

Franb, Farnborough
17/01/2013 at 22:55

As an active member of the Friends group.. it does feel as though certain members of the council are very defensive and not really embracing what the community are saying or trying to achieve?. They are constantly telling us that they have no money, but there was money for other things, such as the purchase of the Pizza hut building for £3.3 million in July 2012. Yes we know the lease represents a good return but equally, what value does that bring to the people who live here? We need entertainment and a thriving town centre, neither of which are present at the moment.

Franb, Farnborough
17/01/2013 at 22:52

I think you are right. It's probably McDonalds that need to be courted. A long shot, but maybe a solution can be found to please everyone. Back in the real world though, I fear the worst.

SpongeBob NoPants, Farnborough
16/01/2013 at 17:50

The cinema is definitely coming - work starts imminently. Ignoring the severe case of "If I ruled the World"itis there is a suspicion, nothing more yet, that McDonalds might have already bought the site:-( E'm not sure how long that would take to show up at the Land Registry.

County Councillor John Wall - Farnborough South Division (@CllrJohnWall), Farnborough, Hampshire
16/01/2013 at 17:46

I won't hold my breath on the cinema, it's been coming soon for thirty years. But in my opinion the town will need more than the cinema to survive. I would like the council to propose McDonalds buy the Police station instead and promote help the friends by courting people like TAG to sponsor it.

SpongeBob NoPants, Farnborough
16/01/2013 at 17:41

I support the proposals but am not particularly impressed with some of what I read. Work on the cinema starts very soon.

County Councillor John Wall - Farnborough South Division (@CllrJohnWall), Farnborough, Hampshire
16/01/2013 at 17:27

I see John, which is why sensible planning with a realistic view of what a future town centre should look like is paramount. There will not be a requirement to come to the Meads as most shopping will be online or at Tesco's meaning empty units and no council tax. You'll need other ways of getting people into the Meads if these units are to be filled and that can only realistically come from arts and leisure. If there is a successful cinema, theatre and musical venue then pubs and restaurants will be present and if people are in town then more shops may live. If there is no cinema, no theatre and no venue we are relying on pubs and restaurants... but what's the draw? I predict a ghost town

SpongeBob NoPants, Farnborough
16/01/2013 at 17:20

We have an ageing population and continual increases in funding are needed to care for them.

County Councillor John Wall - Farnborough South Division (@CllrJohnWall), Farnborough, Hampshire
16/01/2013 at 17:10

Are you suggesting that the elderly don't want to be entertained?

SpongeBob NoPants, Farnborough
16/01/2013 at 16:59

What about the elderly, vulnerable, etc ?

County Councillor John Wall - Farnborough South Division (@CllrJohnWall), Farnborough, Hampshire
16/01/2013 at 16:50

The council should really have placed the arts at the top of the list on their plans. In twenty years time town centres will be unrecognisable. If we concentrate on shop units they will simply be empty. The focus for town centres in the online world will be on restaurants, leisure and entertainment to exist alongside hairdressers, chemists and poundshops. I can only imagine how large shopping centres in small towns will look by then, but Farnborough is in a position to get the balance right before wasting any investment.... starting with TDD.

SpongeBob NoPants, Farnborough
16/01/2013 at 16:48

Remember that "state assistance" costs money. Rushmoor, although it didn't have to, commissioned a report to see if the Tumbly met the English Heritage criteria for listing. Andrew Lloyd spoke at the North Camp Matters Community Association last night (Tuesday) and outlined what Rushmoor could, or couldn't, do about the Tumbly. Their basic position for a while has been that the status quo wasn't acceptable. As they don't own the site they're extremely restricted:-(

County Councillor John Wall - Farnborough South Division (@CllrJohnWall), Farnborough, Hampshire
16/01/2013 at 15:45

I agree with you in the main SpongeBob, but I'd like to point out in the council's defence that the Farnborough Town Centre Prospectus does outline that the 'Pinehurst' area "could also provide a suitable site for a community-led project to develop a theatre/cultural venue." Although it sounds like they expect the people to put in most of the work, I think they do support it in principle.

BlisteringBarnacles! , Sheffield / Farnborough
16/01/2013 at 11:27

I think you may be right that this is the kind of thing intended by Mr Cameron, John. But lets remember that the local council stated that there would not be an arts facility in Farnborough, following the controversy surrounding the Westy a few years back, so the population of farnborough has no choice to pursue this kind of action as there is simply no intention of state assistance. This fight is symbolic on several different levels.

1. The failure of Rushmoor/Hampshire to recognise the true heritage that this building represents to the people of Farnborough. 2. The normalisation of every community by placing the same old national/global brands in positions of community control. 3. The abandonment of Farnborough by it's authorities.

Rushmoor and Hampshire need to listen to their community and start getting behind the cause.

SpongeBob NoPants, Farnborough
16/01/2013 at 10:32

Although I was, perhaps, a little tongue in cheek with my Big Society comment, what the Friends are looking to do reminds me of what I think David Cameron meant.