Agenda item

This report, following a request from the Committee, sets out the position with regards to traditional pubs in the borough, and the Council policies that apply to them.

The Committee received a report on pubs in the borough. The report contained contributions from Planning Policy, Licensing, the Campaign for Real Ale, and the British Beer and Pub Association, and the committee meeting was attended by Pat Cox, Head of Planning Policy, Nick Austin, Director of Environmental Health, David Wilson and Jim Cathcart of the BBPA and Katie Smith, general manager of the Sands End, SW6.

With regards to planning issues, the Committee heard that pubs identified as having community value were subject to a viability assessment before a change of use to residential was agreed. However, the Council had no control over changes of use within retail (i.e. from A4 to A1 or A2, from a pub into a supermarket). With regards to licensing issues, the Committee heard that the Council was responsible for licensing of pubs, but was bound by the Licensing Act to do this on a case-by-case basis. The Council did have in place cumulative impact policies in Fulham and Shepherds Bush town centres, but these did not necessarily mean that an application from a new pub in those areas would be refused.

With regards to the view of the industry, David Wilson of the British Beer and Pub Association said that pubs supported a large number of jobs, including an estimated 2,000 in Hammersmith & Fulham. He said that, in contrast to CAMRA, the Association disagreed with blanket planning restrictions being imposed on pubs, as a number of outside factors, including changing public taste, were affecting the wet-led trade in particular. He noted that many pubs threatened with closure were in or adjacent to high streets, and increasing the success and viability of the latter would assist the former.  He said that the BBPA’s analysis showed that the number of closures was levelling out.

From the perspective of a local operator, Ms Smith said that it was possible to run a pub in the borough, and the company she worked for had two contrasting models at the Brown Cow and the Sands End, with the latter retaining a community feel. She said that it was increasingly less viable to open and maintain wet-led pubs.

Councillor Homan asked about the suggestions made by CAMRA to tighten planning controls. Councillor Nick Botterill said that, having examined the list of pubs still open in the borough, he was convinced that the borough retained a strong pub sector, and that those pubs which had closed were usually trading poorly.

Councillor Homan suggested that there was an issue were change of use led to a concentration of one type of retail. Ms Cox said that the Council had not sought to prevent change of one retail use for another, though it had sought to protect retail as a whole. She said that the level of protection in RBKC was not substantially higher than that in the borough, and that to be protected, a pub was required to have community value and for a willing operator to be found.

Councillor Botterill added that if an area was not attractive to passing trade, pubs found it as difficult as other types of retail to succeed. As such, mini-supermarkets could be of assistance.

Councillor Iggulden suggested that the larger breweries and pub companies managed their estates carefully, and in certain cases, could allow the viability of a pub to decline through their management practices. He said that flexibility would only result in increasing closures.

Mr Wilson said that the focus of his membership was on operating pubs and selling beer, rather than property sales. He said that the demographic changes experienced by the sector affected what could be viable, and that assessment had to be made by the trade itself.

Councillor Harcourt said that the operator could act as Councillor Iggulden described, and that he believed a restriction on change of use from A4 should be imposed. Mr Wilson said that residents were able to register a pub as an asset of community value and this would mean that there was a window to find an operator for the site. However, both he and Ms Smith noted that a site might be viable with a different operator, who might operate it differently, raising issues of gentrification. Mr Wilson noted the importance of entrepreneurial managers in the future of pubs, and the increasing importance of a diversity of beers, but noted that small corner pubs were difficult to operate because of the demographics of the trade.

The Committee thanked all those present for attending and contributing. It agreed that further protection should be investigated by officers.

RESOLVED THAT

(i) The Council should seek to introduce of a pub protection policy similar to that in operation in the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, and;

(ii) The Council should seek greater controls over changes of use within the A class.