Tweet

James Doherty, Principal Planner, Boyer (part of Leaders Romans Group)

Without needing to remind everyone of the importance of pubs and, as the London Plan puts it, the “unique and intrinsic” part they play in British culture, there can be no debate that more and more pubs are shutting down and, in many cases, lying vacant for a significant period of time. Therefore, the question is what to do with these vacant and in many cases, attractive buildings rather than allow them to become dilapidated and fall into states of disrepair?

Whilst some enthusiasts would want to see all vacant pubs restored to their former glory, the chances of pubs which have been vacant for a considerable amount of time reopening as pubs are slim at best. So, what is the best use for these buildings that used to be former hubs of the community? The first answer for many would likely be new houses (for which we all know there is an acute and pressing need) but another use, which in many respects gives a nod to the former pub use, would be as community facilities.

Whilst all Local Plan policies have slightly different nuances, at the heart of the majority is the same aim, to protect pubs. This is all well and good for pubs that are still in use but not ideal for those which have not poured a pint for, in some cases, 10 years and in real terms, cannot be deemed to be considered a pub.

Although the conversion of these “pubs” is by no means impossible (and there are numerous examples of successful conversions), it is fair to say that the process is not the easiest and certainly not the quickest. One thing that virtually all local authorities will require robust marketing evidence to demonstrate that there is no demand for pubs and, often, that the conversion would not lead to an overall shortfall of provision within a certain catchment area.

It is often marketing evidence, and in particular, the length of the marketing period, which is the most frustrating part of the process. Whilst not a universal threshold, many local authorities require two years’ marketing evidence to demonstrate that there is no demand for continued pub use. For a pub which has not been open for 10 years seems somewhat extreme. Nevertheless, it is a policy consideration which will need to be satisfied.

Keeping in mind that no one wants to have to wait for two years to actually make a planning application (let alone how long it could then take to get a decision), the question is, is there any way to shorten this marketing period?

In the first instance, we would always suggest that a marketing exercise is undertaken as soon as possible as it is essential we can demonstrate to the Council that the site is being actively marketed by a suitable agent. This should make negotiation with the Council slightly easier.

Another tactic we have used in the past is to look to see if the site has any unique or mitigating circumstances which mean that it lying vacant for a further two years could have severe detrimental impacts. Given the grandeur of old and traditional pubs, many are, understandably, listed. Therefore, could a heritage argument be made that by putting this building back into use as soon as possible will ensure its long-term protection and retention? It seems obvious that letting a building lie vacant will result in its deterioration, but if the building is listed, lying vacant without any maintenance or upkeep will undoubtedly erode its historical significance and so this is an argument, with support from a heritage expert, that can be put forward to the Council. Would the benefit of preserving a building of historical interest outweigh any concerns regarding a full two year marketing period?

In terms of planning benefit, there is of course that the provision of housing should be considered a key benefit, but this is an argument that virtually any application which proposes residential development can make. Whilst provision of housing is undeniably a benefit, it is unlikely to be found unique by either the Council or an Inspector and to warrant a departure from policy. Therefore, whilst there is no harm reminding the Council of the benefit that more housing will bring, this argument shouldn’t be seen as a “silver bullet” to justify a shorter marketing period.

An interesting example is when a community use is being proposed. Traditionally pubs have always been considered as a place for people to meet and socialise. A place for people to meet and socialise can still be considered to be fulfilling that role as a community hub, just without the sale of alcohol. Therefore, if you are replacing one community use with another, do you still need to adhere to a two year marketing campaign? A lot of this is likely to depend on the wording of the policy and if it specifically relates to the protection of pubs or to the protection of community facilities. If the policy relates to “public houses” then this becomes more of an issue due to a change of use between planning use classes which, undoubtedly will require more marketing evidence.

Whilst there is no “magic wand” to make the marketing requirement go away or the period reduce, there may be examples where at least a reduced marketing period may be deemed as acceptable by the Council. The key to this will be being able to highlight to the Council the unique nature of the site, such as it being listed, and the importance of it being occupied in order to ensure and preserve its historical significance.

Ultimately what is needed is a clear dialogue and understanding between the applicant team and the Council and for both parties to take a proactive and pragmatic approach. It is important that applicants realise that, whilst frustrating, these policies are there for a reason and must be satisfied in some way even if the entire length of the marketing period is not met. For Councils, there needs to be an understanding that applications must be taken on a site-by-site basis and that, where appropriate, flexibility must be applied. At the end of the day, it is fair to say that no one wants to see these impressive buildings lying dormant and dilapidated and would much rather see them put back into an active use and we must work together to achieve this. Boyer has experience of such applications and would be more than happy to help with any queries you may have.

As a caveat, this article is on the conversion of pubs,. Demolition of pubs is an entirely different kettle of fish…!