Detailed Assessment of the Nomination of The Old Cart and Horses, Wortley Road, High Green, Sheffield S35 4LU
Assets of Community Value Nomination-Assessment
DATE OF
SUBMISSION
2014
DATE DECISION TO 15 September 2014
BE MADE BY:
NOMINATED ASSET
The Old Cart and Horses, Wortley Road, High Green, Sheffield S35 4LU
NOMINATION
SUBMITTED BY:
The High Green Action Team
When a nomination for an asset of community value is received, Sheffield City Council will consider the nomination using a staged
process.
Stage 1
Part A and B criteria for assessing whether an asset is of community value is in accordance with that set out in the Assets of
Community Value (England) Regulations 2012. Each section contains a reference to the relevant legislation but please refer to the
guidance notes accompanying this document when assessing the nomination. The paragraph numbering (e.g. A1 etc.) links
between this assessment form and the guidance notes.
PART A-CRITERIA SPECIFIED IN THE ASSET OF COMMUNITY VALUE REGULATIONS
2012
CHECKLIST
Page 1 of 10
A1. Is the nominating organisation an eligible body to nominate? (Section 5 of the Regulations)
Pass
A2. Does the nominating body have a local connection to the asset nominated? (Section 4 of the
Regulations)
Pass
A3.Does the nomination include the required information about the asset? (Section 6 of the
Regulations)
Pass
A4. Is the nominated asset outside of one of the categories that cannot be assets of community
value? (Schedule 1 of the Regulations)
Pass
IF ‘YES’ TO ALL OF PART A, MOVE TO PART B
Pass
IF ‘NO’ TO ONE OR MORE OF PART A, FOLLOW PROCESS FOR UNSUCCESSFUL
NOMINATIONS
PART B -ESTABLISHING THE CURRENT OR RECENT NON-ANCILLARY (PRIMARY) USE CHECKLIST
THAT THE APPLICATION IS BASED ON
B1. Does the nomination form establish the current or recent usage of the asset which is the
subject of the nomination to be an actual and non-ancillary usage? (Part 5, Chapter 3, Section
88 (1) and (2) of the Localism Act 2011.)
Pass
IF YES, GO TO STEP 2.
Pass
Page 2 of 10
IF NO, FOLLOW PROCESS FOR UNSUCCESSFUL NOMINATIONS
Stage 2
Part C and D criteria for assessing whether an asset is of community value has been developed by Sheffield City Council
based on Part 5, Chapter 3, Section 88 of the Localism Act 2011.
Section 88 of the Localism Act states that the asset will be considered to be one of community value if:
a) its actual current use furthers the social wellbeing and interests of the local community, or a use in the recent past has done
so. (the legislation does not provide for a specific period, but as a general rule use in the past five years is considered to be
relevant)
b) that use is not an ancillary one; and
c) for land in current community use it is realistic to think that there will continue to be a use which furthers social wellbeing and
interests, or for land that has been in community use in the recent past, it is realistic to think that there will be community use
within the next five years (in either case, whether or not that use is exactly the same as the present or past); and
d) it does not fall within one of the exemptions.
PART C
CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING WHETHER THE USAGE CURRENTLY OR IN THE RECENT PAST FURTHERS SOCIAL
WELLBEING AND INTERESTS OF THE LOCAL COMMUNITY
C1. What is the ‘local community’
of the asset as defined by the
geographical area?
Evidence provided by nominee
The Applicant states that the Property is visited
by the “local community”, but does not clarify
what is meant by this term. The application
states that the Property is easily accessible to
the communities further afield and supporting
evidence suggests that the users of the
Page 3 of 10
C2. What is the current/recent
use of the asset? (types of
activities)
Property are primarily from High Green and so it
would be reasonable to consider High Green to
be the local community for the property.
Evidence gained from other Letters in support
relevant sources (owner, Ward
member etc.)
Nomination form, timetable of From the evidence given in support of the
events and letters supporting application, the Property would appear to be a
the application. Letter from Cllr “traditional” public house that serves as a local for a
Hunt.
number of local residents. In addition, it supports a
community group and
activities as listed below:




organised
community
It supports a football team, however a time table
of events provided does not refer to the football
team and so it is not possible to establish the
extent of the association of the football team to
the Property. As the Property does not have a
football pitch attached no football matches take
place at the Property
There is a pigeon club with 16 members. The
timetable provided states that it meets on various
days but in the absence of further detail can only
be assumed to be on an ad hoc basis. There
does not appear to be any pigeon coops at the
Property.
There are two fishing club teams, one meets in
the Property on a Saturday and has 20
members, the other meets on a Sunday and has
16 members;
There is a games team with 20 members that
meets and plays at the Property on alternate
Page 4 of 10

C3. How well is/was the asset
used? (evidence of the
building/property/land use)
C4. What will the impact be if the
usage ceases? If usage has
ceased already, what has the
impact been?
Mondays.
The timetable also states that the High Green
Action Team often use the Property for meetings
with up to 20 members present. However, there
is no mention of frequency and this can only be
assumed to be on an ad hoc basis.
Evidence gained from other Letters in support.
relevant sources (owner, Ward
member etc.)
Evidence provided by nominee
The application on the face of it shows an asset
that is well supported by the community.
The application states that the pub is used for:
 A quiz night on Tuesday nights –
attended by 40 to 50 people;
 A karaoke night on Friday and Saturday
night which is attended by 50 to 60
people
 A pigeon club
 A fishing club
 A football club
 The Applicant local action team
Evidence gained from other Letters in support.
relevant sources (owner, Ward
member etc.)
Evidence provided by nominee
From the application it is evident that there will
be a loss of facility if the usage ceases, but
there is not enough evidence to paint a picture
of a cohesive section of the community centred
around the Property. From evidence provided in
and with the application regarding the area of
benefit, it is clear that the Property is not the
Page 5 of 10
only pub in the High Green area. Whilst it would
be undesirable for the current use to cease and
it would be unfortunate if it did, there are other
establishments in the surrounding area that can
provide the same or a similar function
Evidence gained from other Letters in support.
relevant sources (owner, Ward
member etc.)
C5. Does it/did it meet the social
Evidence provided by nominee
The application makes reference to organised
interests of the community as a
team sports and makes reference to use by the
whole and not the
High Green Action Team but doesn’t provide
users/customers of a specific
substantive details. The Property provides
service? (examples would include
choice and options but is not the only venue that
use by local community groups or
the local community could use. There are three
sporting clubs)
other pubs within a short distance of the
Property being the Queens Head, the Market
Inn and the Pack Horse. There is also the
PACES Campus nearby on Pack Horse Lane
which can facilitate local community activities
and is the address of the Applicant.
Evidence gained from other Letters in support
relevant sources (owner, Ward
member etc.)
C6. How is the
Evidence provided by nominee
An email conversation stream. However, this
building/property/land regarded
gives no indication of where the contributors live
by the community? (community
and rather than supporting the application
consultation, evidence of support)
seems to be largely pre occupied with what the
proposed future use of the site will be and more
particularly what supermarket they would prefer.
Seven letters have been submitted in support of
Page 6 of 10
the application, of these 1 is from the local MP,
1 is from the local ward member and 2 are from
local people concerned about access to the
allotments which is currently enjoyed over the
Property car park.
A petition with over 700 signatories but again as
with the email conversation stream rather than
supporting the retention of the Property as a
community asset the principle focus is on
objecting to the proposed convenience store.
Evidence gained from other Although The Property is well regarded by the
relevant sources (owner, Ward people who have made the application, the 700
member etc.)
plus signatories to the Petition seem more
concerned with the future use of the site on
which the Property sits rather than its retention
as an asset that should benefit the local
community.
RATIONALE
FAIL
IF THE NOMINATION PASSES PART C, GO TO PART D.
IF THE NOMINATION FAILS PART C, FOLLOW PROCESS FOR UNSUCCESSFUL NOMINATIONS (PROCESS TO BE
CONFIRMED)
PART D: This section considers whether it is realistic to think that there can continue to be non-ancillary use of the
building or other land which will further (whether or not in the same way) the social wellbeing or social interests of the
local community).
CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING WHETHER (FOR ‘CURRENT’ USES) THERE WILL CONTINUE TO BE SOCIAL USE OF THE
ASSET OR (FOR ‘RECENT’ USES) THAT IT IS REALISTIC TO THINK THERE WILL BE COMMUNITY USE AGAIN WITHIN
THE NEXT FIVE YEARS.
Page 7 of 10
D1. What is the proposed future
use of the asset? (types of
activities)
Evidence provided by nominee
Evidence gained from other
relevant sources (owner, Ward
member etc.)
D2. Will it meet the social
interests of the community as a
whole and not the
users/customers of a specific
service?
Evidence provided by nominee
Evidence gained from other
relevant sources (owner, Ward
member etc.)
RATIONALE
PASS/FAIL
IF THE NOMINATION PASSES PART D, FOLLOW PROCESS FOR ELIGIBLE NOMINATIONS (PROCESS TO BE
CONFIRMED)
IF THE NOMINATION FAILS PART D, FOLLOW PROCESS FOR UNSUCCESSFUL NOMINATIONS (PROCESS TO BE
CONFIRMED)
RECOMMENDATION
The Old Cart and Horses public house at High Green is not listed as an Asset of
Community Value
REASON FOR DECISION
The evidence provided by the applicant suggests that this is a commercially viable
pub business providing karaoke and quiz nights in High Green. It also facilitates
certain community activities. The majority of these are based around sports such as
football, pigeon fancying and fishing. By their nature, these will appeal to certain
parts of the community rather than the community as a whole. Also, there are no
Page 8 of 10
facilities at the pub itself for football or pigeon racing. The application does not
specify what activities actually take place at the pub in relation to these sports. This
would suggest that the football and fishing teams and the pigeon club are capable of
existing independently of the establishment in which they meet. The application also
refers to use by a community team, but it does not provide further details such as
the nature of the meetings, their frequency or the number of people involved. Also,
the Applicant which is the community team in question has as its address PACES
Campus which can provide facilities for community groups such as the Applicant in
which to meet.
The legislation and the guidance issued by the Government do not provide a clear
definition of what an asset of community value should be. The view taken by the City
Council in relation to businesses, such as pubs, that serve the public is that there
needs to be evidence of usage that suggests that the property acts as a hub or focal
point for a significant proportion of an identifiable community, in order to justify
registration as an asset of community value. That usage should also be more than
ancillary to the principle use of the property.
In relation to the Old Cart and Horses it is clear from the application that the
principle use of the property is as a commercial public house. There is community
use, but much of it is fairly narrowly focused on people with sporting interests.
There are other community uses, but there is nothing to suggest that, in total, they
are anything other than ancillary to this principle use. It is also unclear what the
local community for the purposes of the application is. If it is taken to be the High
Green area, whilst there are a number of people, who are behind or have expressed
their support for the application, they represent a small proportion of the population
of High Green. There are also several other pubs in the High Green area that could
provide a similar function to Old Cart and Horses.
Page 9 of 10
In conclusion, it appears from the evidence provided that this property’s actual and
current use does not further the social wellbeing and interests of the local
community sufficiently to satisfy the statutory tests set out in sections 88 a) to d) of
the Localism Act 2011
DECISION TAKEN BY
Councillor Mazher Iqbal, Cabinet Member for Communities and Inclusion
DATE
Page 10 of 10