Pub to dwelling at The Twelve Bells, Cirencester

What was proposed

The application sought to change the public house into a residential dwelling with an ancillary bed-and-breakfast outbuilding.

“Change of Use of a Public House (Sui Generis) to a Residential Dwelling (C3) with ancillary B&B outbuilding at The Twelve Bells 12 Lewis Lane Cirencester Gloucestershire GL7 1EA”

Officer report

The site and its setting

The site is a Grade II listed, two-storey public house in the Cirencester South Conservation Area and partly within a scheduled monument area.

“This application relates to The Twelve Bells Public House, located along Lewis Lane within the Principal Settlement of Cirencester. The Twelve Bells Public House is a Grade II listed designated heritage asset dating from the early 18th Century. The public house is a 2-storey building constructed in traditional coursed squared limestone rubble with a traditional stone slate roof.”

“The application site is located within Cirencester's Development Boundary and just outside Cirencester's Central Area, as defined by the adopted Local Plan Polices Map. The site is located within the Cirencester South Conservation Area. The southern section of the site is within the Corinium Roman Town Scheduled Ancient Monument area.”

Officer report

Heritage and other impacts

Officers considered heritage harm less than substantial, with no harmful physical alterations, and found limited effects on neighbours, highways, biodiversity and protected habitats.

“The change of use would result in the loss of a public house, a use that contributes to social and communal value within the conservation area, as well as part of the character and special interest of the building. The Conservation Officer highlights the importance of communal value as a contributor to heritage significance, referencing Historic England's Conservation Principles.”

“As such, whilst less than substantial harm would be caused to heritage assets, these are considered to be outweighed by the public benefits associated with the continued use of the site.”

Officer report

Who spoke

An objector opposed the loss of the community asset, the agent defended the marketing exercise, and the ward member questioned the public benefits and viability evidence.

The final decision

The committee refused the application because insufficient information showed that the pub was not viable or that local demand for it or an alternative community use was absent.

“Reasons for REFUSAL: Policy INF2: Avoid loss of community assets and need to demonstrate that there was no local demand for the facility or for an appropriate alternative community use. Insufficient information submitted to convince not viable.”

“Councillor David Fowles proposed and Councillor Daryl Corps seconded the proposal to REFUSE the application…”

Minutes