Wednesday 16 February 2011

February newsletter 2011


February 2011


The Campaign for the Morden Tavern

Central Road Morden [do not write to this address] 16 Feb 2011


A Pub Fit for Heroes

This fine 1933 pub in the vernacular revival style by architect Sir Harry Redfern FRIBA for Truman Hanbury and Buxton’s Black Eagle brewery has endured the vicissitudes of many suburban pubs since the inter-war heyday of pub building.

Stripped and altered unsympathetically in 1962 and in 1974, it lost key parts of the wonderful historic interiors that Redfern and his contemporaries like Sidney Clark at Charrington’s, were famous for. When built, it had four large and decorative marble fireplaces, oak panelling, oak plank floors and specially designed lighting, bar and bar back, all now sadly lost.

The loss of these decorative finishes and fittings, much to our chagrin, made an appeal against the Secretary of State’s refusal to 'list' the pub in September 2010, however illustrious the architect, impossible.

Listing, despite common perception, does not ‘preserve a building in aspic’ forever; it merely applies controls over changes that affect the things that make it special – mostly the physical materials it’s made of, but often too its setting, or surroundings.

What survives of ‘the Tav’ is the external walls, windows and roof, internal joinery on the ground floor and original early fittings and fixtures upstairs, such as fine blue and white tiles, enamel baths and Art Deco sinks in the bathrooms. Its plan form, of several public rooms grouped around a central bar area is fundamental to its design.. A really key part of its survival though is its setting- in a very large garden on a corner plot at a crossroads and on a social housing estate. These aspects of the site are most significant.

The Morden Tavern’s special qualities lie in two key features. The first is that it is a notable design by a versatile and highly regarded inter-war architect knighted for his contribution to architecture. More than that, he was particularly a specialist in pubs for inter-war social housing estates, of which St Helier is the second largest by the London County Council (LCC)’s ‘Homes for Heroes’ initiative replacing inner London slums demolished as unfit for habitation during and after the First World War.



Sir Harry enjoys a splendid reputation as the designer of a whole series of inter-war pubs on a major social housing development in Carlisle. There the Government flirted briefly with the notion of state control the retail supply of beer, known as the State Management System. For the SMS Redfern designed no fewer than 14 pubs, seven of which survive and all of which are Grade II listed. Fortunately they have not been quite as brutally treated as ‘The Tav’, although one, like the Morden Tavern, is threatened with conversion to a Tesco.

The St Helier housing estate itself gives the Morden Tavern its second element of importance as the last surviving one of four specially designed Refreshment Houses devised quite specifically for a purely domestic, residential setting and all by Redfern. Their intended purpose was to be a social focus essential to the happiness and well-being of the thousands of disparate residents newly arrived from inner-city slums and were thus removed from their previous social networks.

The 1930s ‘improved’ pub was no working-class beer house. These were a suburban phenomenon, specifically designed to be suitable for residential areas and for the needs of families. They were expected to make a lot of their income – the Morden Tavern was expected to make the majority of its revenues – from the cooking and serving of meals. In addition, there were often dance halls, billiards rooms, children’s play rooms and external garden spaces similarly subdivided for eating, drinking and playing. Rooms could be hired for parties and events, and catering provided for a wide variety of community occasions from weddings to wakes, engagement parties to electioneering.

These important aspects of the Morden Tavern were identified and brought to the attention of Merton Council’s Conservation Officer, Caroline Kearey, in November. She agreed that it was worthy of recognition and in December it was added to Merton’s Local List of architecturally and historically important buildings by Ged Curran, Merton Council’s Chief Executive. While Local List status does not give statutory (i.e. legal) protection under the main Listed Buildings Act, the recent introduction of something called PPS5 means that proper consideration must be given to Locally Listed buildings’ special qualities when applications are made for alterations to the fabric of the building or its setting.

The new scheme is expected to include a bar of some description. This bar is somehow supposed to mitigate against the loss of what is, and was meant to be, a multifaceted hub of social activity for the St Helier community. In reality, it is in effect returning to the days of the Victorian Beerhouse whose sole purpose was to dispense alcoholic drinks, with no facilities for the hospitality needs of a suburban community. To offer a bar as a ‘replacement’ is to miss the point of the Morden Tavern completely.

The history of flats-over-pubs and converted pubs as flats-over-bars is not promising. Lock up bars used mainly as vertical drinking places without food are very often the source of trouble and noise. How long will it be before the new residents object to a licensing application for a bar on nuisance grounds, giving the developer exactly what they wanted all along, retail throughout and residential above?

The Morden Tavern’s survival is down to the fact that for 77 successful years it was the focus of social activity in the St Helier community. Performing the role for which it was originally intended by the LCC and Sir Harry, the Tav is a local landmark, a rallying point, a place of relaxation, of refuge, of celebration, commiseration and commemoration.

Let's keep it that way.

© 2011 Dale L Ingram MSc.,
historic buildings consultant and CAMRA member.


A Nice Little Earner?

The campaign group has been busy since you last heard from us discovering just how a successful historic and Locally Listed public house in the ownership of a local authority should find itself under threat of redevelopment.

The Morden Tavern opened in 1933 as one of the four St Helier Estate’s ‘Refreshment Houses’ which were specifically designed to be appropriate for families and has formed a social hub for the community in just the way it was planned to. That is, until it closed in August 2010 without consultation or notice.

This followed a planning application last May for conversion of the building to shops and flats, and building over the garden with houses and flats, which was refused after huge local opposition generated 412 objections to the scheme.

But how, we wondered (and have been busy on your behalf finding out) has the last estate pub, owned by the very local authority which can give permission for its loss, found itself in this predicament?

Merton Council seem to be very keen to ensure that we don’t find out what actually happened until the next planning application (see ‘New Plans’ on page 3) has been considered and (presumably) approved by its own planning committee. The information we have been able to gather from local councillors and from the Council themselves under the Freedom of Information Act shows a jigsaw from which a number of key pieces of the puzzle are still missing.

Merton Council tell us, for example, that the decision to sell the freehold of the Morden Tavern was taken in July 2009. What we don’t yet know is who took that decision and on what basis.

Was the Freehold offered to Enterprise Inns who in July owned the remainder of the 99 year lease which still has 21 years to run? If Enterprise had bought it, disposing of the lease would have been much easier and imaginably much more financially advantageous.

In October/November 2009, the remaining 7 year lease was offered by Enterprise for sale through AG&G. They are leisure property specialists and estate agents whose website proclaims their ability to sell pub properties for ‘redevelopment’ - I.e. conversion to other uses, such as flats, offices or supermarkets, or for demolition and replacement with, er, flats, offices or supermarkets.

The lease was acquired by Reef Estates, on whose behalf, we are led to believe, AG&G approached Merton Council to ask if the Freehold interest might be available and were allegedly answered in the affirmative. The timing is crucial here. If Reef Estates acquired Enterprise’s lease knowing - perhaps they were even already in negotiations with Merton Council- that they could acquire the Freehold, they were at a significant commercial advantage to any of the other leasehold bidders. No checks appear to have been made by Merton to see that, in the words of their own main Planning policy document, the UDP (Unitary Development Plan):


“4.217 In order to satisfy the tests set out in this policy [L16] applicants need to provide evidence clearly showing that
[1] the public house is no longer economically viable and
[2] that the property has been marketed as a public house for a reasonable period usually no less than a period of 2 years.
This is likely to mean showing evidence of the appointment of property consultant/estate agent to handle the marketing of
the property and records of how and where the property has been marketed.
[3] Applicants may also carry out an assessment of the needs of the local community for community facilities to show that
the public house is no longer needed and that alternative provision is available in the area.”


We know that there was at least one other interested party who would have bought the Tavern to run as a community pub but his bid was allegedly ignored by AG&G. This piece of information runs contrary to the information supplied to us by Merton Council under a Freedom of Information request which stated that no other bidders came forward to purchase the lease except Reef Estates. This provides proof that this statement is untrue and we have filed a Local Government Ombudsman complaint against Merton Council on the strength of it.

The Council has, in its key planning document (the UDP) a Pub Protection Policy, which it is worth quoting in full:



POLICY L.16: PROTECTION OF PUBLIC HOUSES
THE COUNCIL WILL NOT PERMIT THE REDEVELOPMENT OR CHANGE OF USE OF


ESTABLISHED PUBLIC HOUSES TO OTHER USES EXCEPT WHERE:
(i) THE APPLICANT CAN SHOW THAT THE PUBLIC HOUSE IS NO LONGER ECONOMICALLY VIABLE
(ii) THE APPLICANT CAN SHOW THAT REASONABLE ATTEMPTS HAVE BEEN MADE TO MARKET THE SITE AS A PUBLIC HOUSE
(iii) THERE IS ALTERNATIVE PROVISION WITHIN THE LOCAL AREA

It would appear, therefore, that when Merton Council said in their decision document ‘This is a pub for which local demand has clearly been reduced’ and ‘Demand for the facilities that this public house provided has deteriorated over recent years’, what they were actually trying to do was justify their actions by reference to their adopted policy on the retention of public houses. But then they went on to say that these statements were actually:



a/ “just opinions” and
b/ “had no bearing on the decision to sell” and
c/ “required no research as to their validity.”



If this is true, why were they in the decision document at all? We contend that they were inserted deliberately to give a false picture of the Morden Tavern as an unwanted and unviable commercial and community facility, on which Cabinet member Andrew Judge relied to make his decision to agree the Freehold sale.


The Freehold has yet to be sold to Reef Estates. Sites are frequently sold ‘subject to planning consent’. In this case, our understanding is that the sum that Merton Council will get relies on the amount of development Reef Estates are able to secure through planning permission and ranges from £800,000 to £2.3million [page 3]. Given the state of council finances and the lure of such a sum for its coffers we hope that members of the planning committee who will be aware of this arrangement may not be unduly influenced in their decision as to the size of the development granted, or indeed as to whether it is granted at all.


Reef are currently working with Merton’s planning officers on a second planning application for a small bar, shops, flats and housing on the site. We will be responding to this when it is brought for consultation in March but already have our fears for the bar proposal so close to residential properties and the loss of the much cherished garden and its trees. We have a copy of the proposed plans which we hope to make available via our Facebook page http://www.facebook.com/MordenTavern , subject to copyright rules.


The site has deteriorated with vandalism, fly-tipping, theft of copper pipes inside the building and lead from the roof, the subject of much correspondence with Reef Estates and Merton Council. We are very frustrated at the lack of progress in securing the site and any ongoing repairs (the roof still had no lead after
eight weeks).


It is heartening to see the vigour that the leader of Merton Council and champion of Merton’s Pub Protection Policy quoted above has given to defending the Brewery Tap from redevelopment into flats in Wimbledon. We invite him to show a similar level of energy in defending the Morden Tavern which has
an even better case for being left to serve the community as intended, and as protected by provisions under L.15 in the UDP relating to community pubs in residential areas.


What you can do:

We will be organising a public meeting once the new plans have been issued to get residents’ views. Let us know if you want to be notified of this so that you can come along. When you come,
encourage friends and neighbours to come too.

We are always looking for volunteers especially people with researching capacity. We are presently investigating the Reef Estates group and any additional expertise in corporate law or
accountancy would be particularly useful. But all are welcome to help leaflet, canvass or contribute to the Newsletter.

If you too have doubts about the way this matter has been handled by the Council, please write to Chris Lee, Merton Council’s Director of Environment & Regeneration at the Civic Centre or contact your local councillor by phone or letter.



The New Plans

Following the unsuccessful planning application in the summer of last year referred to above, we are now expecting a new application which may be put out to consultation during March, date currently unknown.

The new scheme must take account of the pub’s revised status as a building of Local historic and architectural interest (as an entry on the Local List, as described on page 4). Consequently, demolition and replacement is no longer an option.

The new scheme, as designed, shows that the ground floor of the pub will be given over to retail uses, possibly a Tesco Metro or Sainsbury’s Local and a small bar of some description, with the upper floors converted to apartments.

Joined to the existing building by a glass link building, or double height lobby, will be a 3 storey block of flats, while the rear garden, along Abbotsbury and Blanchland Roads, will be crammed with eight 3 bedroom maisonettes and four 3 bed houses with one off-street parking space per property.

What are the problems with this?

Parking for residents in the flats. Where will they go?


  1. Parking for residents in the large family houses in Blanchland Road. Each house has an off-street parking space, but if let to professional sharers, or a family where both parents drive to work, where will the extra cars go?
  2. Noise nuisance. Vertical drinking establishments without a food option (and there is no kitchen in the new plans) such as lockup bars have a greater incidence of noise and mess than traditional pubs. There is therefore potential for the future residents to complain about this at future applications for licenses to the local authority, with the foreseeable loss of even this small concession.
  3. As you will read elsewhere in the Newsletter, the Council has several planning policies (L.15 and L16) which clearly state that pubs, especially those with additional community use spaces- the Morden Tavern can hardly be a more perfect example will not be allowed to be lost by demolition or conversion to other uses.
  4. Loss of local services and small businesses. The installation of a major retailer in converted pubs on housing estates has the effect of driving small local independent retailers out of business. The parade of shops along Central Road are rightly fearful of the effect this may have on their business.
  5. Heritage issues:



a/ The conversion of the ground floor of the pub to retail will require the front to have enlarged openings to take plate glass shop windows. The site plan also shows that a very large extension of the building to the rear is also intended, to increase the retail floorspace and allow additional living area upstairs. These alterations will cause the loss of important historic fabric, I.e. original windows and brickwork, and is inconsistent with good conservation practice, which states that alterations should be reversible. This is so that it could be converted back into a pub if a new owner wanted to.



b/ the block of flats and development to the side and rear of the main pub building will see the loss of the glazed ‘Winter Garden’, like a big greenhouse but intended as an indoor cafĂ©/restaurant for damp
English weather. It was constructed at the same time as the pub. This has been boarded up on the outside, but has great potential for extra capacity for the pub as originally intended and previously used,
if repaired and brought back into use. It’s the little fat upside-down-L shaped building to the north of the pub, shown left.


c/ The pub was designed to have large green garden spaces around it for two reasons. Firstly, to give good separation between the noise of a busy social hub from neighbouring properties and secondly the
gardens themselves were ‘green rooms’ where customers of all ages and sizes could eat, drink and play. Such large gardens are characteristic of the inter-war ‘improved’ public house, and by
building on the garden, one of its most significant features is being destroyed.


d/ There are still original and historic features of the building surviving upstairs in the living area, especially in the bathrooms, which were kitted out expensively with high-quality decoration and furnishings. It would be tragic indeed to see the further loss of good materials in the building from the conversion works.



Get your objection ready for the planning application which is expected in April, after the consultation in March. If you need help, please let us know.