Jump to content
DavePick

Pub on the Estate?

Recommended Posts

DavePick

In August 1936, Sheffield citizens who, as part of the slum clearance programme, were moving into the new Sheffield Council estates were asked to take part in a referendum. They  were offered the opportunity to vote as to whether they wanted public houses to be built on their estate.

In favour were: Arbourthorne, Manor,  Shiregreen,  Woodthorpe and Wybourn.

Against were:  High Wincobank, Longley and Norwood, Stubbin and Brushes and Wisewood.

I would be interested in any memories from this vote.

Sheffield (Municipal Housing Estates) Referendum Committee (1).jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
History dude

Malcom Mercer did a piece on this in a Manor Memories booklet in May 1997.

It all started with the ruling in 1928 that there shall be no licensed premises on any Council housing developments. A few years later a vote was defeated that would have allowed them.

A committee was appointed and referendum followed in 1936, except for Woodthorpe (45%) turnout was never above 27%.

The result was the Council would allow ONE on each estate, but since they would cost £55K to build, decide to provide only the land and lease only.  Rules were set down though, tables not a bar, food, beer from two breweries. Good tenants and toilets!! 

The outcome for the Manor was the Manor Hotel in 1939.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lysandernovo

I grew up on Shiregreen ( Low Shire) which when built was one of the biggest  housing estates in Europe. With the exception of the "Penguin" ( which was built in the 50/60s) all of the pubs were on the periphery of the estate...meaning, for some, a nice long walk after a night out!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DavePick

The referendum occurred on Tuesday 18th.August 1936:

In favour: Arbourthorne, Manor,  Shiregreen,  Woodthorpe and Wybourn

Against: High Wincobank, Longley and Norwood, Stubbin and Brushes and Wisewood

 

for

against

majority

No.voters

Turnout

 

Arbourthorne

584

92

+492

2539

26%

High Wincobank

91

146

-55

1667

14%

Longley and Norwood

465

595

-130

4237

25%

Manor

1097

595

+502

7182

23%

Shiregreen

868

750

+118

8907

18%

Stubbin and Brushes

176

288

-112

2900

16%

Wisewood

59

198

-139

1844

13%

Woodthorpe

749

68

+681

1863

61%

Wybourn

361

93

+268

3065

14%

Of the 34,204 entitled to vote, only 7,275 voted (21.3%). Woodthorpe produced a turnout of 61%, the rest averaged under 20%. 

figures from:   Daily Independent  20th.August 1936  page 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DavePick

I'm trying to work out the six pubs which resulted from this referendum:

Arbourthorne - Arbourthorne Hotel

Manor - Manor Hotel

Parson Cross - Parson Cross Hotel

Shiregreen - Shiregreen Hotel ? 

Woodthorpe - Richmond Hotel ? Woodthorpe Hotel?

Wyborn - Windsor Hotel ? 

any ideas? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lysandernovo

The Shiregreen Hotel until the opening , post War, of the Penguin was the sole pub actually on the large estate...even so, both were on the extremities with the former scarcely being on the estate!

As an aside, I note that turnout in the poll was extremely low...a bit like current local elections.!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
leksand
On 18/04/2020 at 12:31, DavePick said:

I'm trying to work out the six pubs which resulted from this referendum:

Arbourthorne - Arbourthorne Hotel

Manor - Manor Hotel

Parson Cross - Parson Cross Hotel

Shiregreen - Shiregreen Hotel ? 

Woodthorpe - Richmond Hotel ? Woodthorpe Hotel?

Wyborn - Windsor Hotel ? 

any ideas? 

 

Here is a list of dates of grants of provisional licences for erection of premises in the expanded Sheffield licensing area around the time of the noted referenda.

1936/5/5 - RICHMOND HOTEL, RICHMOND.(though not subsequently confirmed until March 1938 when it was noted as having been erected! - there is a possible error in recording here as May 5th is also noted as date of non-confirmation by the same authority - plans were approved 1936/3/20)

1937/4/6 - PUNCHBOWL, GLEADLESS COMMON (perhaps not well known is that this was originally going to be known as the Arbourthorne Hotel, but rival brewers Stones also submitted the name for a later application which they completed four months before these premises - the alternative name preserved the title of a former pub on the Moor, one of the houses given up in consideration of the final grant of this licence)

1937/5/4 - SICEY HOTEL, SICEY AVENUE (original grant given up 1938/3/21 for revised plans)

1938/3/21 - PARSON CROSS HOTEL

1938/3/21 - MANOR HOTEL

1938/3/21 - SHIREGREEN HOTEL

1939/2/7 - SPRINGWOOD HOTEL, WOODTHORPE

1939/2/7 - WINDSOR HOTEL, WYBOURN

1940/3/5 - WHITE HORSE, HALIFAX ROAD

1940/3/19 - HERRIES RD / RAISEN HALL RD (not realised - eventually dropped around time of grant for DEVONSHIRE ARMS temporary premises)

1941/5/6 - FIRVALE HOTEL, BARNSLEY ROAD

There had also been a number of significant developments in areas peripheral to these in the decade preceding, including building of the Wharncliffe Hotel and Magnet Hotel, rebuilding & upgrading (to a publican's licence) of the Traveller's Rest, City Road and the upgrading of the licence of the Belle Vue, Wybourn which had itself been rebuilt at the start of the 1920's. The Cricket Inn, Wybourn was rebuilt 36/37. Both the Woodthorpe Arms and Elm Tree Inn were completely rebuilt to plans approved in the latter part of the 1920s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DavePick

thanks for this - very useful - the six pubs seem to be:

Arbourthorne - Arbourthorne Hotel - closed 2015 - Carter, Milner & Bird

Manor - Manor Hotel - closed 1990 - Truswells

Parson Cross - Parson Cross Hotel - closed c2016 - Tennants

Shiregreen - Shiregreen Hotel  - closed 2008 - Gilmours

Woodthorpe - Springwood Hotel - closed 2010 - Stones

Wyborn - Windsor Hotel - closed c2011 - Gilmours

- however, why two Gilmours and no Wards? 

Did Wards not take up the offer? 

Was the Windsor not one of the six?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
leksand
2 hours ago, DavePick said:

thanks for this - very useful - the six pubs seem to be:

Arbourthorne - Arbourthorne Hotel - closed 2015 - Carter, Milner & Bird

Manor - Manor Hotel - closed 1990 - Truswells

Parson Cross - Parson Cross Hotel - closed c2016 - Tennants

Shiregreen - Shiregreen Hotel  - closed 2008 - Gilmours

Woodthorpe - Springwood Hotel - closed 2010 - Stones

Wyborn - Windsor Hotel - closed c2011 - Gilmours

- however, why two Gilmours and no Wards? 

Did Wards not take up the offer? 

Was the Windsor not one of the six?

How do Dave,

The Arbourthorne Hotel was a Stones development. The Punchbowl was Truswell's which became a subsiduary of Hope & Anchor. Both were eventually brought within the Bass empire (H&A via Charrington) and as Bass North I'd imagine were both branded Stones for the bulk of their existance. The Springwood was a CMB application (not previously a property led company), they becoming Hope & Anchor shortly afterwards. The Shiregreen is another odd one in that the applicants and subsequent owners were stated to be the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, Citizens &c (so essentially the Corporation). As Rawson premises were surrendered it makes sense that Gilmours should have ended up as operators. The RIchmond was Ward's. The remainder were, I think, as you state.

I expect the terms suggested above regarding developments were altered somewhat (or someone somewhere along the line misinterpreted what they were in the first place). Beer from two breweries is an unlikely demand for expensive new premises like these and clearly was not enacted (maybe there was some intention for the Shiregreen). Perhaps the nominal development opportunities for the areas that declined were passed on to those that consented! In terms of who went for what, this really depended on what licences the breweries were ready to sacrifice and this was, in turn, influenced by what was due to be cleared elsewhere. Stones, Tennants & Gilmours all had large estates with plenty of capacity for surrender (as did John Smith's who are the most notable absentees). There were also other areas where the breweries were developing (and re-developing) in this period, this being only part of the cake available to them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
leksand

I had wondered whether the move away from heavily liveried properties might have had something to do with legislation, rather than simply architectural/company preference. Not sure it is the case as the trend away from integral advertising had been there for quite some time, with Gilmour's the last adherants (of those who had taken it up in the first place), but this era does seem to have marked the last projects of that type. Also, there were a number of stylistically similar buildings built in the same period which were on land previously owned by the developer, so presumably were not bound by specific undertakings (though may have been by broader restrictions or new by-laws).

With regard to the OP, is it known whether the referenda were organised by the council, or were they set up by an interest group to petition against development of pubs on the estates? I'd guess the literature pictured was not published by council, but was it an "official" publication of the organisers? If the vote was only ever going to be advisory it would perhaps help to explain not only the lack of uptake, but also the slightly confusing disconnect between the outcome and premise that we observe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DavePick

In August 1936, Sheffield saw one of few local referendums regarding licenced premises. Tenants on each of the nine largest of the new council housing estates which were replacing inner-city slums were asked by Sheffield City Council (SCC) if they were ‘in favour of licensed premises being provided on the estates.’  

Turnout was low. There seemed to be a view on the smaller estates that as licensed premises were relatively close, there was no point in voting. Of the 34,204 electorate, only 7,275 voted (21.3%). Woodthorpe had a 61% turnout, the next highest was 26% (Arbourthorne) with five estates having a turnout of less than 20%. In favour were Arbourthorne, Manor,  Shiregreen,  Woodthorpe and Wybourn with High Wincobank, Longley and Norwood, Stubbin and Brushes and Wisewood voting against.

In 1938, SCC approved the granting of leases to six brewery companies for the building of public houses on municipal estates:  Arbourthorne, Manor, Parson Cross, Shiregreen, Woodthorpe and Wybourn, each on 99-year leases. Parson Cross was not involved in the 1936 ballot.

The total building cost was given as £55,000. The six Sheffield breweries concerned were: Carter, Milner and Bird Ltd., Duncan Gilmour and Co.Ltd., William Stones Ltd., Tennant Bros. Ltd., Truswells Brewery Co.Ltd. and S.H.Ward and Co.Ltd. Construction, the responsibility of the brewery companies, commenced later in the year.

There have been other similar local referendum, over the question of whether buildings which had originally been built as coffee taverns (ie. pubs in all but the sale of alcohol) should become licensed premises. These include the Bridge Inn (Port Sunlight) where a 1903 vote saw over 80% voting for a liquor license and the Skittles Inn (Letchworth).

TG Daily Independent 19 August 1936 image.jpg

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
leksand

Very interesting.

I was preparing a horribly long winded, not terribly satisfactory, case by case study of how all the detail presented might be shoehorned together when I noticed there is a very simple answer (other than the one that I was avoiding - that it can't).

On the 21st of March 1938 licensing magistrates allowed provisional grants of removal of licenses for 6 projects in or around the areas discussed all of which were subsequently confimed on the 5th of May 1938. They were:

1. "Arbourthorne Hotel" (Truswell), subsequently The Punchbowl, ~Arbourthorne (Hurlfield Rd). Provisional grant of 1937 had not been confirmed.

2. Sicey Hotel (Tennants), ~Shiregreen. Confirmed provisional grant 1937 for a different project on Sicey Avenue given up 21/3/38 and grant given for the site subsequently developed.

3. Arbourthorne Hotel (Stones), Arbourthorne (Errington Rd).

4. Parson Cross Hotel (Tennants), Parson Cross.

5. Manor Hotel (Truswell), Manor.

6. Shiregreen Hotel (Corporation (?-Rawson)), Shiregreen.

This looks to be where the idea of six pubs came from and may have been reported/promoted as such at the time. I'd guess the idea of 6 breweries arose as an assumption from someone with a knowledge of the post-war Sheffield brewing landscape but perhaps not entirely aware of the scenery prior.

The Springwood Hotel (C.M.B.), Woodthorpe and the Windsor Hotel (Gilmour) both had plans approved and provisional licences granted on 7/2/39, subsequently confirmed 14/3/39. These seem clearly related to specific referenda and so sit more comfortably in a latter consideration of the subject than the Punchbowl and Sicey. Substituting them into the "six" could give us six breweries if Rawson were involved in the Shiregreen Hotel, but why the Corporation should then be recorded as sole owners/developers is not clear.

The Richmond Hotel (Wards), ~Woodthorpe had it's licence granted on 1/3/38 but by this time it was already built. Confirmation of provisional licences had been refused in 1936 & 1937. I would speculate that these refusals related to alterations in plans which had received planning approval but only gained approval from the licensing magistrates retrospectively (on 1/3/38). The eventual confirmation of this licence, allowing the pub to open, came on 29/3/1938, before the confirmation of provisional licenses for the "six". Plans had been approved for this pub, by the licensing magistrates, before any referendum was held. This licence can not reasonably have been conditional to the outcome of any referendum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DavePick

The references to six breweries is from the Daily Independent, 1st.January 1938.

The six Sheffield breweries concerned were: Carter, Milner and Bird Ltd., Duncan Gilmour and Co.Ltd., William Stones Ltd., Tennant Bros. Ltd., Truswells Brewery Co.Ltd. and S.H.Ward and Co.Ltd. - public houses on six municipal estates:[1] Arbourthorne, Manor, Parson Cross, Shiregreen, Woodthorpe and Wybourn. Parson Cross was not involved in the 1936 ballot.

Carter Milner & Bird (1899/1942) became part of Hope and Anchor in 1942 when their Hope Brewery merged with the bomb damaged Anchor Brewery. This, along with Truswells (1847/1954) became part of Bass Charrington in 1963. Bass had previously acquired Stones in 1958. Gilmours (1831/1954) were taken over by Tetleys while Tennants (1889/1962) came under the Whitbread ‘umbrella.’ S.H.Wards became part of the Vaux empire in 1972, the brewery finally closing in 1999, the same year as the closure of Stones Cannon Brewery.

[1] Daily Independent 1st.January 1938

Daily Independent 01 01 1938.jpg

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DavePick

assuming that the leases were granted after 01/01/1938, the following seem to be the pubs concerned:

ARBOURTHORNE HOTEL - Arbourthorne - Stones

1938/3/21 - PARSON CROSS HOTEL - Parson Cross - Tennants

1938/3/21 - MANOR HOTEL - Manor - Truswells

1938/3/21 - SHIREGREEN HOTEL - Shiregreen -  Corporation - subsequently, Gilmours

1939/2/7 - SPRINGWOOD HOTEL - Woodthorpe - Carter Milner & Bird

1939/2/7 - WINDSOR HOTEL - Wybourn - Gilmours

but why no Wards? - perhaps the Shiregreen hotel was allocated but never became a Wards pub? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
leksand
On 02/07/2020 at 09:25, DavePick said:

assuming that the leases were granted after 01/01/1938, the following seem to be the pubs concerned:

ARBOURTHORNE HOTEL - Arbourthorne - Stones

1938/3/21 - PARSON CROSS HOTEL - Parson Cross - Tennants

1938/3/21 - MANOR HOTEL - Manor - Truswells

1938/3/21 - SHIREGREEN HOTEL - Shiregreen -  Corporation - subsequently, Gilmours

1939/2/7 - SPRINGWOOD HOTEL - Woodthorpe - Carter Milner & Bird

1939/2/7 - WINDSOR HOTEL - Wybourn - Gilmours

but why no Wards? - perhaps the Shiregreen hotel was allocated but never became a Wards pub? 

I expect Ward's expressed a preliminary interest but when it became apparent what monopoly value was to be asked opted out. They were not a huge company with a massıve estate, were not as prominent in the areas due for clearance as the other parties, and had commited to surrender their "more discardable" licenses in respect of a similar property, the Richmond. They'd have had a good idea of what turnover could be expected from a place like the Shiregreen, so I presume they considered potential combinations for surrender and came to the conclusion either that there was insufficient potential for the outlay required, or that their standing holding offered better prospects.

I've had a bit of a dig to try and clarify the status of matters surrounding the Shiregreen and it seems my suggestion of an association with Rawson's is a misnomer. The licence formally transfered to the Shiregreen was that of a Rawson pub, however the other three properties surrendered in consideration were each from different breweries. We have an indication of the explanation for this, in that the corporation is the stated developer, even though there is no stated association to them with regard to ownership of the surrendered properties. However, I know from company records that in some cases of compulsory purchase, the corporation would enact the purchase and then lease back the property to the "registered owner". Whilst the Corporation does not appear in records as the registered owner, they do, as owner, have the right to surrender. I think, in order to adhere to their own demands, this must have been the case here.

Now quite why the Shiregreen should have been closed for tender when, as you suggest, at least two other apparently related project sites were still "open for bids" is not clear. Perhaps this is not the case, because construction does appear to have experienced some delay, but then what should make it so much less attractive that it didn't subsequently attract an independent developer? I don't know by what process Gilmours came to run it, but expect this to be determinable at some point.

I'm still not convinced that this should be limited to 6! I don't think the question mark in "Six sites to be leased?" suggests conjecture regarding leasing arrangements. I reckon the Punchbowl ticks every box and I'm inclined to think the Sicey was too (though I think it may have borne a livery at some point). These two pubs were both granted provisional licences by the licensing magistrates without having plans approved by the same.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DavePick

The Punchbowl was approved by SCC before January 1938 - hence, I ruled it out of the six, especially as the Arbourthorne is relatively close.

I tend to agree regarding the Shiregreen - Wards had first choice, but decided not to take up the offer & Gilmour’s took on the pub. I’ve had a look at lists of Wards pubs and there are none which opened in 1938/9 which fit the bill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DavePick

The Parson Cross Hotel (Deerlands Avenue, Sheffield S5 8AA): in June 1939, it was opened, by Tennants, at the same time as two of their other pubs, the Sicey Hotel (Shiregreen) and the Highcliffe Hotel (Fulwood, now known as Greystones). The Parson Cross Hotel and the Sicey Hotel both closed ~2016. Greystones is now run by Thornbridge Brewery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
leksand

When coming to the end of writing the previous reply another possibility dawned.

The provisional licence granted to Tennants in 1937 which was ditched on 21/3/1938, that I had presumed to be a precursor to the Sicey Hotel by virtue of their subsequent association with that development, was nothing of the sort. The only detail I have of the 1937 project was that it was due to be on Sicey Avenue, and, of course, the Shiregreen was also on Sicey Avenue. Ward's never had any interest in the Shiregreen. Ward's wanted the Sicey, but this was the most costly of the tenders and there was no way they could sanction the required depletion to their estate. They stepped down and Tennants jumped in at the eleventh hour, without plans, but even for them the cost demanded for 3 of these projects were too great (in terms of surrenders alone, for the Sicey & Parson Cross they gave up 3 full licences & 7 beerhouses), so the Shiregreen was left without a developer.

That is, of course, all speculative - but I think it's quite plausible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
leksand
On 03/07/2020 at 19:03, DavePick said:

The Parson Cross Hotel (Deerlands Avenue, Sheffield S5 8AA): in June 1939, it was opened, by Tennants, at the same time as two of their other pubs, the Sicey Hotel (Shiregreen) and the Highcliffe Hotel (Highcliffe, now known as Greystones). The Parson Cross Hotel and the Sicey Hotel both closed ~2016. Greystones is now run by Thornbridge Brewery.

Indeed. The Highcliffe application was processed the same day as six other applications for new premises - The Punchbowl (under the name "Arbourthorne Hotel", Sicey Hotel, Arbourthorne Hotel (Errington Road), Parson Cross, Manor Hotel and Shiregreen. I didn't raise it before because it clearly wasn't related to the referenda. However, it does further illiustrate how Tennants were stretching themselves and could lend credence to "Scenario 2". The order of recording would suggest it was processed before the others.

I think I can see why Truswell's might have been given special treatment and allowed an "early pick" (I'll spare you another essay for the time being), but the first provisional grant was well after the referendum and the plans were not approved until the same day as the others - with the exception of the Sicey, which, for some reason, didn't get its plans approved until June!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lysandernovo

An interesting topic! I wonder, has anyone thought of asking the City Council for clarification under the Freedom of Information Act....or will all records by now have been either destroyed or transferred to the Archives? I am unsure as to how long records have to be kept...but I do know there is a schedule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
leksand
On 04/07/2020 at 11:47, lysandernovo said:

An interesting topic! I wonder, has anyone thought of asking the City Council for clarification under the Freedom of Information Act....or will all records by now have been either destroyed or transferred to the Archives? I am unsure as to how long records have to be kept...but I do know there is a schedule.

Isn't it! There are definitely items at the archives which may help elucidate - I beleive everything relevant from that period from both planning and licensing has either been destroyed of passed on. Identifying the applications to the planning department (as opposed to those to the licensing magistrates), should be possible and should clarify matters somewhat. There could be useful information in the surviving brewery records too,

On 03/07/2020 at 18:54, DavePick said:

The Punchbowl was approved by SCC before January 1938 - hence, I ruled it out of the six, especially as the Arbourthorne is relatively close.

I'm not sure what the source of this is information is, or quite what you mean by SCC. In this era plans would need to be passed by the planning department before being submitted to the licensing authorities for further clearance (the latter are the plan approval dates that have been stated during this discussion). Planning clearance tended to proceed by a couple of months and sometimes more. It is quite possible that all of the submissions to licensing processed in 1938 had been approved by planning in 1937. You would expect the provisional grants of licence to coincide with licensing's approval of plans. What is irregular here is that in 2 instances this is not the case. I don't think that these are clerk's errors, so what in these cases can have made it necessary to grant a provisional licence? There is no compulsion for that in the normal process.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lysandernovo

By SCC I mean the Sheffield City Council whom, presumably, are the custodians of all such records or should know whether they have been destroyed or placed in the Archives....I do, of course, recognise that in the period we are discussing and, indeed, until 1974 our local authority was known as Sheffield Corporation. I am far from an expert on these matters but from a little experience, many years ago, believe "provisional" licenses were granted when the Licensing Magistrates were not entirely happy with arrangements but were prepared to see the premises open. One example I knew of was whilst the Police made an additional report on matters raised by the Magistrates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
leksand
1 hour ago, lysandernovo said:

By SCC I mean the Sheffield City Council whom, presumably, are the custodians of all such records or should know whether they have been destroyed or placed in the Archives....I do, of course, recognise that in the period we are discussing and, indeed, until 1974 our local authority was known as Sheffield Corporation. I am far from an expert on these matters but from a little experience, many years ago, believe "provisional" licenses were granted when the Licensing Magistrates were not entirely happy with arrangements but were prepared to see the premises open. One example I knew of was whilst the Police made an additional report on matters raised by the Magistrates.

Sorry, that bit was referenced back to DavePick's earlier comment, not yours. Probably should have done 2 posts - like now. Apologies for the confusion.

A provisional grant (of removal of licence) in ths instance is essentially the grant of permission from the Licensing Magistrates to develop a new site as a licensed premises. This in normal circumstances coincided with their approval of plans for the development and defined terms by which the licence proper can be fulfilled (including the licence to be "removed" to the premises). A finished premises can't sell alcohol on this "provisional licence". That can't happen until the grant is declared final which happens when the LM's agree the building is suitable.

It shouldn't be mistaken for interim authority (a temporary right for somebody other than the licensee to operate under a licence until it can be transferred) or a term licence which granted a building the right to operate as licensed premises for a specified period, generally under particular restrictions or caveats. These could reasonably be and probably were described as provisional licenses, though it is quite possible that all of these processes are long obsolete!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lysandernovo

Thanks for the clarification of the different terminology. Now that the system has changed and all matters are now dealt with by the Council...at least that is my understanding....is the granting of licenses any easier?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...