The upper frontage of the Royal Vauxhall Tavern
Following the launch earlier today (April 16 2015) of the RVT Future campaign –which aims to ensure a thriving future for the UK’s oldest LGBTQ pub and iconic performances space – the pub’s chief executive has come out against the campaign’s efforts to make the Tavern a listed building.
According to James Lindsay, chief executive of Vauxhall Tavern London Ltd, “it will reduce the flexibility that any pub needs to survive”.
But there’s little reason to fear that a listing would stand in the way of the commercial viability of the pub.
A listing doesn’t mean that changes can’t be made to a building. And the listing process fully recognises how important it is for a building to be kept in use after designation.
I can’t claim to be disinterested here: I am a member of RVT Future, and I wrote the application to English Heritage to make the Tavern a listed building. So obviously I disagree with Lindsay on this issue.
But I certainly respect his position on the matter, and in fact think it’s quite reasonable for someone in his situation – except that he needn’t worry about a listing jeopardising the pub’s ability to survive.
A listing simply recognises that a building has special architectural, historical or cultural merit, and means that if an owner wants to carry out work that would compromise those qualities, they have to convince planning authorities the trade-off is worthwhile.
Redevelopment plans can still be proposed and considered on their merits by planning authorities.
A listing might single out specific features of note while excluding whole parts of the building from protection, particularly if they are not particularly noteworthy and their alteration might be in the interests of the venue’s economic future.
It would certainly be harder to knock a building down and build an entirely new one but not necessarily to carry out redevelopment work – especially if, as is the case at the RVT, few of the original interior fittings remain, and especially if a strong case can be made that such renovations are needed to secure the economic viability of a building.
My application to list the RVT does highlight certain architectural features, such as the building’s brickwork facade, and the metal columns in the pub’s main space, which could be the sole known remnants of the pleasure gardens that stood on the site of the RVT from 1661 to 1859.
But the main drive of the application is to recognise the building’s importance in the history and culture of the LGBTQ community. If that argument is accepted, then planning authorities could well give the green light to any number of renovations.
No one wants to restrict the ability of the RVT to serve its community – the point of a listing would be to make it harder to lose the entire building, not to prevent specific changes that serve the interests of the RVT as an institution.
In short, while Lindsay’s desire to avoid any additional restrictions is understandable from a business point of view, there’s little reason to fear that a listing would jeopardise the commercial viability of the pub.
Lindsay’s full statement reads:
“I have been involved with the RVT for over a decade and am proud to continue to operate the pub as an LGBTQ venue.
“The pub has struggled commercially for a number of years and the new owners continue to support me in my efforts to run a successful business. The English Heritage listing is not something we support, because it will reduce the flexibility that any pub needs to survive.
“I would encourage anyone who wants to support the RVT to head down to the pub and have a drink with friends, both old and new and continue to support the venue.”
It should indeed be a source of pride that the RVT continues to operate as an LGBTQ venue – it’s a tough business and Lindsay has approached it with vigour and dynamism.
It’s good too to hear that the new owners, Immovate, are supportive of Lindsay’s efforts in this regard. Commercial sustainability is absolutely crucial to any pub’s operation, and the suggestion that the new owners are actively engaged in supporting this is heartening indeed. (I hope it involves investment as well as kind words.) Certainly, it would be much more worrying if they displayed no interest in maintaining the pub’s successful operation.
Lindsay’s final point is worth repeating: “I would encourage anyone who wants to support the RVT to head down to the pub and have a drink with friends, both old and new and continue to support the venue.”
Hear, hear. I’ll drink to that!
