Pub campaigners have reacted with fury and surprise after planning chiefs in Bristol admitted they ‘take the developer’s word for it’ when the owner of a pub says it should close down because it’s not economically viable.
Planning officers at City Hall told astonished councillors that they ‘take on trust’ the figures provided by development companies, pub chains and landlords, who want the council to give planning permission to close pubs and turn them into something else - usually housing developments.
The revelation only came about when councillors said the Campaign for Real Ale were challenging the figures on the latest pub closure application.
READ MORE: Fury at plan to turn famous pub into home for 34 people
Councillors on one of Bristol’s planning committees will now write to Mayor Marvin Rees to urge him to make sure viability reports are properly scrutinised.
When the owner of a pub or a developer applies for planning permission to close a pub and convert it into something else, they have to meet one of two conditions.
The first is that there are adequate alternative pubs that people living nearby can easily go to, and the second is that the pub is no longer economically viable. The planning officers ask for a viability report, giving pub owners or developers the chance to provide the financial figures to back up that claim.
At the latest planning committee meeting, Bristol City Council’s head of development management Gary Collins admitted that the planning officers in his department don’t scrutinise those figures at all - and simply take the applicants’ word for it that their financial claims are true.
Discussing an application to close the Fulford House pub in Hartcliffe, Mr Collins was questioned by councillors about whether the pub’s viability report had been looked into. The pub had spent much of 2020 closed because of the pandemic, and the Campaign for Real Ale questioned the robustness of the figures, and the claim that the pub had not attracted a buyer who could keep it running.
More than 100 local people objected to the closure of the Fulford House in Hartcliffe and Withywood, with many saying that under the right ownership, it could be a viable business and benefit to the community.
Read more: The best pubs in Bristol according to the Good Pub Guide
Read next: Wadworth Brewery confirms sale of eleven pubs in South West
The planning officer dealing with the application said: “Essentially it has been a self-assessment, taking on trust the figures that have been put in. I’ve not picked apart their accounts and I don’t think I’m qualified to do so.
“There is a declaration when an application is submitted that all the information submitted is truthful., and I’ve based it on my reviewing of the marketing information and viability information as well,” he added.
Councillors from all parties began questioning why that doesn’t happen and Mr Collins stepped in. “When we look at housing developments and affordable housing viability reports, we have access to external consultants,” he said.
“We don’t have ready access to that - looking at commercial activity is a very different thing, we don’t have ready access to that type of expertise, so it is largely taken on trust, but we do look across at other applications we receive and what’s been accepted in the past.
“It doesn’t receive the level of scrutiny a housing viability gets, and that’s what our recommendations are based upon, really. I have to be totally honest that’s the level of scrutiny with this type of application, across the whole city normally gets. In making your decision, you have to factor that in,” he added.
Councillors on the Development Control A Committee meeting pointed out that the council’s own planning policy means they can send a pub’s viability report to an independent expert to look through and check whether it’s robust or not, and charge the fee for that to the applicant.
"I don't know how to answer that"
Cllr Ed Plowden asked why that was not done. “In the CAMRA submission, it says according to our policy, the viability will be sent for independent verification with the applicant bearing any costs and this will be provided," he said. "Is that an accurate statement of what the policy said?
“This is the second time I’ve seen a pub up when we have very much just taken their word for it that this isn’t a viable business. If that’s in the policy, why aren’t we sending these for independent verification?”
One of the planning officers was then heard to whisper: “I don’t know how to answer that” to a colleague, before Mr Collins said it was a city-wide practice that no one checked pub viability reports, or sent them to be checked at the applicants’ expense.
“Traditionally we haven’t done that, wherever the pub in question is within the city, so it’s not about taking a different approach to different areas, it’s something that we haven’t gone to that length of scrutiny, in the past or at the moment on proposals involving the loss of public houses.
"I’m sure the committee will have a view on that.
“It’s a different area of work, it’s not an excuse but it’s a reason why we haven’t done that. We’ve been consistent, but we’ve consistently not sought external advice on these kinds of viability appraisals,” he added.
In the end, councillors voted to give the go-ahead to the application to turn the Fulford House pub into an HMO - a house in multiple occupancy that could see as many as 34 people living there. Planning officers said the pub had failed the test that there was an alternate provision, so the only one it could pass was the unchecked viability report.
The planning row was reminiscent of the saga of the Windmill pub in Bedminster, which went before the planning committee four times. The applicant wanted to close the pub and turn it into flats, and got permission once, but another pub owner who wanted to buy it and keep it open threatened the city council's planners with a judicial review - precisely because the robustness of the viability report had not been checked.
Eventually, in a planning saga that lasted almost two years, planning permission was denied in November last year.
Last November, the Bristol branch of CAMRA launched a Save Bristol’s Pubs campaign, citing at least half a dozen pubs which had been the subject of closures and applications to redevelop.
At the time, CAMRA said the council should be more robust in making the owners of pubs or the developers who want to close them down show more clearly that they are not viable businesses.
At the time, Bristol CAMRA Pubs Group chair Nigel Morris said: “We have been supporting these campaigns over recent months and were heartened to see that, in some cases, despite a few setbacks, local community groups are still determined to save their neighbourhood pubs.
“The pubs in question have been closed for a while but are still much missed by the community. It is often said that pubs would not close if they were viable. However, there are numerous examples of pubs around the country that were deemed unviable by the owners only to turn into thriving pubs under new ownership.
“Equally, owners sometimes want to cash in on the value of the property which can be worth a lot more for residential or other purposes and this is particularly the case in Bristol with its high property values.
“However, pubs have been at the heart of our communities for many years and the people trying to save these pubs clearly believe that they can once again be turned into thriving locals. In some cases, community groups are looking at buying these pubs, demonstrating the belief that they can be financially viable and successful,” he said.
“We have lost quite a few pubs in Bristol in recent years and some areas now have no or hardly any pubs left. When communities are prepared to organise themselves to try and save their local pubs, we will support them and offer advice,” he added.
Reacting to the revelation at the planning committee, Mr Morris said he was surprised to hear the council admit they didn’t check pub owners’ claims, even though they could make the developers pay the costs.
“The council is taking the developers’ word for it, and not doing anything to check this,” he said. “I am surprised, but it does explain a lot. The council is doing anything it can to see pubs closed down and turned into homes, because it’s the council tax income they want.
“It’s a short term gain for a long term loss, because you can have all the houses you want, but you need community facilities too.
“It was a surprise to me, because I thought they’d at least check. We’ve lost so many pubs over the last few years,” he added.
Want our best stories with fewer ads and alerts when the biggest news stories drop? Download our app on iPhone or Android
Find out about Hartcliffe with this A-Z of everything that puts the heart into the 'Cliffe
Find all the latest news about pubs and bars in Bristol
