Council blocks Whitby adult gaming centre’s ‘harmful’ renovation plan
A ‘harmful’ application for illuminated signs at the front of a 24-hour adult gaming centre in Whitby has been refused.
Luxury Leisure’s plan to install new lighting and signage to the front of the former Halifax at 67-68 Baxtergate has been rejected by North Yorkshire Council (NYC) as it would result in “undue nuisance” and harm to neighbouring residential properties.
The site is being converted into an adult gaming centre (AGC) as part of plans by the company, which trades as Admiral. An NYC planning committee rejected the conversion plan last year, but the refusal was overturned on appeal by a Government planning inspector.
Concerns about the plan were raised by Whitby Civic Society, the town council, and the council’s environmental health service.
The proposal would have resulted in the installation of white ‘cool’ LED lights in the ‘halo’ form, according to a report, which said they would reflect on the respective overhanging signage and would internally illuminate the letters and branding to the front of the building.
Whitby Town Council said that any installation should be time-limited, switched off overnight, and that an external wall-mounted hanging was not appropriate in the location.
Town councillors also expressed concerns about potential light pollution.
Planning officers said that “whilst there may be some evening illuminations at the local public houses, these are a form of traditional use which are sympathetic to and reflect the historic vernacular of the streetscene, and are much more muted and in-keeping with the subdued historic character using ‘warm’ lighting”.
A council report said the proposal would result in a form of illumination which would harmfully detract from the prevailing character of the area.
The report added that the character of Baxtergate “is such that the majority of commercial uses are of a daytime nature only”.
It noted that while there are pubs on the high street, most of these close at 11pm.
Officers concluded that the application “would result in adverse harm on the residential amenities of neighbouring properties in terms of undue nuisance lighting throughout the unsociable hours”.
They added that “furthermore, no evidence has been provided by the applicant by way of a lighting assessment to demonstrate that this form of lighting would not result in adverse harm”.