Luxury Leisure has re-applied to North Yorkshire Council to extend the opening hours of its Admiral AGC in Scarborough, having been refused permission by the Scarborough and Whitby Area Planning Committee twice previously.
Plans to operate the Westborough venue 24-hours were opposed by Scarborough Town Council and North Yorkshire Police, however Luxury Leisure has objected to both authority’s miscategorisation of the AGC’s activities.
And it is a risible objection raised by the authority as the application noted. “There is simply no planning justification to suggest the existing AGC use is a ‘honey pot’ for criminal or anti-social behaviour or disorder,” the statement said.
“There is no crime associated with the existing AGC use during the existing permitted hours, and there is no reasonable basis to suggest there would be any increased crime or anti-social behaviour or disorder associated with 24-hour use of the premises.”
It would have been the stuff of comedic parody in normal times, a crazed councillor rattling off total nonsense as if the bell for sundown hour had just been rung. But with the passage of new Gambling Impact Assessments making their way through Parliament, much to huge objection from licensing officials themselves, this council commentary highlights the very reason why Aim to Permit was so vital a protection for planning applicants.
If this is the standard bearer for GIAs, then it could prove to be a very expensive joke for the councillors and their councils. Frivolous objections simply won’t cut it in the new age of planning.
Meanwhile back in lalaland, Scarborough Town Council had based its previous objection on the grounds of “community impact, social cohesion and inclusion,” and added that granting the latest permission “would create an undesirable precedent.”
And planners have recommended that the committee refuse the application. “While planners said the centre contributed to both the daytime and evening vitality and viability of the town centre, they warned that approving the proposal ‘would result in significant harm’ to the residential amenities of neighbouring properties,” reported the BBC.
Well prove it. Because under the GIA criteria those councillors will have to do exactly that.
