Planning inspector has 'serious misgivings' over Cambridge pub protection policy

The comments came in a decision by the Planning Inspectorate, which dismissed an appeal to turn the Rosemary Branch pub in Cambridge into residential use.

Cambridge City Council’s controversial Interim Planning Policy Guidance (IPPG) was the first of its kind in the UK and requests a site to be marketed for 12 months as a pub that is free of tie and restrictive covenant.

In January, the PMA ran an exclusive story about the British Beer & Pub Association (BBPA) launching a judicial review over the policy. The organisation believes that the policy is too confining for pubs.

Planning inspector Paul Crysell wrote: “I understand the council’s desire to address this problem but have serious misgivings about the IPPG’s validity.

“It introduces policy outside the formal development plan process and is contrary to Local Planning Regulations, which came into effect on 6 April 2012. The IPPG provides a policy framework that has not been independently tested and I accord it little weight.”

A Planning Inspectorate spokesman said: “It is established practice that policies increase in weight as they go through statutory processes and, as such, this policy would not carry the same weight as a formally adopted plan.”

Cambridge city councillor Tim Ward said: “A policy for the protection of pubs is expected to be in the draft local plan when published this summer, which will, at that point, acquire weight as a material consideration and, in effect, supersede the IPPG — which is after all only ‘interim’ and only ‘guidance’.”

A BBPA spokesman added: “Leaving the specifics of this case to one side, we certainly share concerns about the council’s policy and how it has been adopted.”

Property agent Tom Nichols, of Everard Cole, said: “It’s positive there’s going to be protection for pubs but the policy was a knee-jerk reaction to losing too many pubs in Cambridgeshire.”