Unfortunately, the gambling arcade on Huntingdon High Street is going ahead. I think it’s the wrong decision, though I understand why the DMC reached the decision. As the law stands, you have to have what are called ‘material considerations’ – basically, something in planning law. As I understand it, that’s because the DMC is essentially carrying out a regulatory function. My impression is that several councillors who voted for the application did so because, although they did not actually want the thing to go ahead, they felt that there was no planning reason to turn it down. One of the other problems with planning law is that decisions can be taken to appeal and often – too often – planning inspectors side with developers. Care has to be taken in giving reasons for decling a proposal as otherwise it can be overturned by the planning inspector, sometimes with costs awarded as well.
Three councillors, including Cllrs Conboy and Humphrey, voted against. Cllr Wakeford spoke against, having recused himself. Cllrs Butler and Neish proposed the restriction on hours. I will say, though, that I was unimpressed with one member of the committee – I don’t know their name – who, as I recall, said that the police didn’t have an problem with the application, and so basically there weren’t any reasons to oppose it. Indeed, I think too much of the committee’s debate was on anti-social behaviour, rather than social and economic impacts, or compatibility with the local and neighbourhood plan. I think there were grounds to reject the application because it doesn’t comply with the Huntingdonshire local plan and the Huntingdon neighbourhood plan that weren’t really addressed and, in that respect, I felt the debate was lacking.
One of the things that became clear in the meeting is the effect of the 2021 National Planning Policy Framework and, more particularly, the change in Use Classes made in 2020 have taken yet more power away from local government and effectively given it to developers with the imprimatur of the state. Despite talk of local politics and levelling up, we continue to have a very centralised state in the UK.
One of the things that became clear in the meeting is the effect of the 2021 National Planning Policy Framework and, more particularly, the change in Use Classes made in 2020 mean that there is even more leeway for developers, and so less power for local councils to shape how their communities develop. I don’t want to be partisan, and planning in the UK has been a mess for a long time, but this has to be laid squarely at the door of the current government. The changes make it easier for one type of premises to be converted to another without reference to local councils. The UK, and particularly England outside of London, is very centralised, and I don’t think the discussions of localism and levelling up will have much meaning unless there is meaningful devolution of decision making and funding away from Westminster and Whitehall. Unfortunately, I think that the changes in the law mean that the Huntingdonshire Local Plan and the Huntingdon Neighbourhood Plan are, as with similar plans across the country, much less important than they were. I think that fact, and the effect of covid, may mean that we need to revisit both documents.
Below is the text (more or less) of what I said at last night’s Huntingdonshire District Council Development Management Committee. The supporting papers, including the my written representations, are on the HDC website, particularly Late Representations 2.
To begin, I should say that Huntingdon Town Council, 677 petitioners, Cllr Wakeford, and I don’t share Oliver Cromwell’s views on gambling. The objection is to this particular proposal in this particular location at this particular time because this establishment, in a prime location at the centre of the High Street, is going to make the town less attractive both to other businesses and to visitors and shoppers at a time when Huntingdon High Street is fragile.
There are sufficient material considerations for the DMC to decline this application. As set out in my written representation, this proposal can be declined under NPPF paragraph 11 as it is neither economically nor socially sustainable. It is not economically sustainable because of the negative knock-on effects it will have on other businesses, present and future, on the high street. It is not socially sustainable because the harms that gambling causes will be magnified in this prominent location at the intersection of the High Street, Chequers Court, and St Benedicts.
Even if you consider it to be sustainable, NPPF paragraph 12 makes clear that the proposal must still meet with local and neighbourhood plans. As the Deputy Mayor of Huntingdon and I set out, the proposal does not meet TC1 on retail development, TC2 on the public realm, TC3 on St Benedict’s Court, or TL2 on leisure and community facilities from the Huntingdon Neighbourhood Plan, or LP21 on town centre vitality and viability, or LP34 on heritage assets and their settings from the Huntingdonshire local plan. The proposal can be and should be declined on any and all of these grounds.
In crude terms, a prospective business owner who comes to Huntingdon and sees all it can support is a gambling arcade is not going to be inclined to invest. A visitor to Huntingdon who sees that a gambling arcade is slap-bang in the middle of the high street is not going to be inclined to return. I do invite you to do a Google image search for ‘Cashino’ and determine for yourselves how well that would sit with the local and neighbourhood plans.
As the Grimsey Review, and particularly the post-covid update, shows, high streets are at something of a turning point. The fallout from covid seems to be that more people will be working from home, but that retail is struggling and will continue to struggle. We need to decide what we want our High Street to be – either a prosperous market town, with a vibrant high street that caters to the increasing number of people working from home, or the kind of unloved high street that is too familiar to us, stuck in a vicious circle of low footfall and boarded up shops.