‘Agent of Change’ protects music venues from noise complaints, but won’t stop them from closing

This guest blog was written by Marion Roberts, Professor of Urban Design, University of Westminster.

A Conservative minister for housing, a grey-haired Labour MP, ageing icons of rock and creative young people have formed an unlikely alliance in support of the Agent of Change (Planning) Bill. The proposed law, which will be discussed for the second time in the House of Commons on March 16, makes developers responsible for dealing with noise issues when they build new homes near music venues.

This all came about because people were worried about the high number of live music venues that were closing across the UK. The Greater London Authority (GLA) asked for a report on London’s grass roots music venues, only to find that 35% of them had been “lost” since 2007. Cities across the nation – from Glasgow to Manchester – have similar stories to tell, even though the government has recognised how important the music industry is for the economy.

So how did this happen? Many different governments since around the year 2000 have tried to get more flats and houses built in cities, because there aren’t enough for everyone who wants to live there. Many homes have been built on “brownfield” sites – where there used to be factories or warehouses, which are now used less or not at all. These types of places also offered spaces where creative entrepreneurs could set up new clubs, or take over existing venues and attract new customers with the offer of live music.

Buyer beware

But as people move into the new flats built on these sites (which they often pay a lot of money for) some inevitably complain about the noise coming from the venues. Venue owners in Shoreditch (one of London’s hip neighbourhoods) actually put up signs warning would-be buyers that there are live music venues in the area.

Up until now, these complaints caused big problems for music venue owners, because planning principles were not on their side. The onus was on them to ensure their neighbours weren’t disturbed by music and loud noises. But putting in proper soundproofing or keeping customers quiet can be difficult and expensive.

This doesn’t just affect the kind of places run on a shoe string on the outskirts of town. Even London’s mighty Ministry of Sound – which has been a mecca for House music lovers since 1991 – was caught up in a lengthy planning application for a tower block of flats nearby – a case which eventually ended in the flats having to be soundproofed.

A matter of principle

The way the planning system works, is that local authorities in England and Wales produce their own development plans, which must align with national policy as set out in a 2012 document called the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). This document made a small move to protect venues, by saying that if they wanted to expand, then there should be no unreasonable restrictions. But it didn’t address the situation described above.

Some local authorities have already started to draw up their own policies, which put the burden of noise reduction measures firmly on the developer who is making the change – whether it’s for flats or other uses. This is the legal principle, known as the “Agent of Change”. The bill, now supported by government, will ensure that the principle is embedded in the NPPF – so all local authorities will have to follow it. It will also carry more weight in appeals against planning decisions.

Although the “Agent of Change” principle will help prevent live music venues from closing, it won’t be enough on its own. Sadly, it would not address other issues such as rising rents, hikes in rateable values and property owners preferring to redevelop their buildings into flats. For example, consultancy firm Nordicity estimated that a revaluation of business rates would cause a fifth of London’s grass roots venues to close. And London’s oldest LGBTQ venue, the Royal Vauxhall Tavern, is still engaged in a battle to save it from redevelopment, by way of a community buy out.

Yet past examples show that people can save their local pubs from closure, whether through local campaigning or by taking ownership of the buildings. And to see creativity and culture, especially for young people, supported through the dusty corridors of parliament, is truly heart warming.


Marion Roberts is Professor of Urban Design, University of Westminster.

This article was originally published on The Conversation website and has been republished with permission under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

If you enjoyed this blog, why not read some of our other blogs:

The death of nightclubs?

by Stacey Dingwall

Last month, Islington Council confirmed that one of London’s biggest clubs, fabric, would not be reopening. The nightclub’s licence had been suspended following two-drug related deaths at the venue. Over 150,000 people, including the Mayor of London Sadiq Khan (whose Greater London Authority has no power to intervene in licensing decisions) have since signed a change.org petition demanding the club be allowed to reopen. Ironically, Khan has recently announced that he will be appointing a ‘Night Czar’ for the city. This new figure will be responsible for developing London’s night time economy, which is currently worth £41 billion and supports more than 1.25m jobs. The recent launch of the night tube is also intended to grow the city’s night time economy.

The night time economy

We’ve previously looked at the importance of the night time economy to the UK’s economic growth. A 2015 report from the Night Time Industries Association (NTIA) placed the economic value of UK’s night time economy at £66 billion, employing 1.3 million people and representing 6% of the country’s GDP.

The Arches in Glasgow closed in similar circumstances to fabric last year. These clubs are just two of many that have closed their doors in the last decade. Between 2005 and 2015, the Association of Licensed Multiple Retailers (ALMR) estimate that the number of clubs in the UK fell from 3,144 to 1,733. The body believes that if this trend continues, the country will be left worse off “culturally, socially and economically”. Others have also highlighted the potential impact on youth employment, which is already a significant problem for the UK.

Who or what is to blame?

Some within the industry have pointed to the introduction of the smoking ban, longer pub opening hours and the recession as potential explanations for a decrease in the popularity of nightclubs. Others have placed the blame on planning policy and a “hostile” licensing climate. This is particularly evident in London, where widespread property development is prioritised in order to create the affordable housing the city so desperately needs.

There are also those that criticise the police’s “heavy handed” attitude towards drugs, and a stereotyping of clubs and those that frequent them. Police Scotland have come under particular criticism for the way in which they engaged with the Arches when it was still open. According to Dr Jack McPhee, a drugs and alcohol policy expert at the University of the West of Scotland, since the amalgamation of Scottish police forces, “…the recovery of controlled drugs and successful prosecutions became performance indicators in Scotland. So that in itself began to dictate police activity”. Scotland’s prosecution rate for drugs related offences is almost twice that of the other UK nations.

Comparisons with the rest of Europe

In comparison, drugs policy on the continent tend to focus more on harm reduction. In the Netherlands, for example, clubs use the Drug Information and Monitoring System (DIMS), which allows users to test the safety of their drugs. Rather than focusing on criminalisation, systems like these focus on public health, recognising that people will continue to take drugs regardless of how many venues the police close down. Indeed, some have voiced their concern that a continuation of current UK policy will only increase their use in the dangerous, underground market, whereas moving towards proper regulation could save lives.

A brighter future?

Despite this, the recently appointed director of government and public affairs at industry body UK Music, Tom Kiehl, believes that the night time industry has a “bright future” under the new government. Recent comments from Sadiq Khan in particular have given Kiehl confidence that planning and licensing restrictions may be lifted in order to support the growth of the night time economy. In addition, a successful club based drug testing system is currently being tested on a small scale in the UK, which may see a shift in current law enforcement attitudes depending on the results.

Follow us on Twitter to see what developments in public and social policy are interesting our research team.