Item 7 - Appendix 3
West Dunbartonshire Council · 11 September 2024
Back to Planning Committee — 11 September 2024 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
Pay day lending and betting shops Draft Planning Guidance Consultation Report ITEM 7 - APPENDIX 3
Page 2
Introduction This report presents analysis of the results of the Draft Pay Day Lending and Betting Shop planning guidance consultation and the changes to the guidance resulting from the feedback. The consultation took place between 13th May and 5th July 2024 and took the form of an online survey. The survey was circulated to the Local Development Planning Mailing list, promoted on the council’s social media, and circulated to the Council’s Citizen Panel. Responses are also made to individual comments provided in the survey. Some comments go beyond the remit of the planning system and advice has been sought from legal colleagues with regard to the licencing of gambling premises where necessary. Key Findings and Changes The survey received 17 responses. All respondents identified themselves as individuals, with none identifying as community councils, community groups, businesses, or agents. Summary of Views The table below presents the responses to the “yes or no” questions in the survey. Yes No No Response Is the summary of the evidence and local context within the guidance clear and appropriate? 16 1 - Do you consider a cap on the number of pay day lending and betting shops within town centres to be appropriate? 15 2 - The current version of this guidance only applies to core retail areas of Clydebank and Dumbarton Town centres. This updated guidance will apply to whole town centre areas. Is this appropriate? 16 1 - The current version of this guidance does not apply to Alexandria Town Centre. This updated guidance will apply to Alexandria Town Centre. Is this appropriate? 17 0 - Is the application of NPF4 policy 27 part C clear? 15 1 1 Have the existing clusters of pay day lending and betting shops within town centres been correctly identified? 15 2 - Is the application of LDP2 policy SC2 Criteria and SC3 clear? 16 1 - Is the approach to applying policy SC4 (Local Centres) in relation to pay day lending and betting offices appropriate 15 2 - Is the application of LDP2 policy SC4 clear? 16 1 - The majority of respondents agreed that the summary of evidence was appropriate, that applying a cap within town centres is appropriate, clusters of pay day lending and betting shops have been correctly identified and that the application of policy is clear.
Page 3
Respondents were given the opportunity to provide additional information to support their answers. The main criticisms of the guidance include: The evidence does not include information on pay day lending and betting shops outside of the town centre and so does not provide the full context. The guidance should apply to the whole of West Dunbartonshire. Limiting application of the policy to town centres means these uses could be pushed out into local centres, or other locations. As drafted the guidance allows for zero pay day lenders in Alexandria, which is not overprovision. Application of Local Development Plan 2 Policies does not align with National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4). The guidance demonstrates prejudice against these uses by the council. Summary of Changes As a result of the consultation responses the following changes have been made to the background information and guidance document. The Following changes have been made to the background information document: Additional information has been added on the number of pay day lending and betting shops in Local Centres (Dalmuir, Hardgate, and Glasgow Road in Dumbarton) and in other locations outside of designated centres. Maps for Dumbarton and Clydebank updated to reflect most up to date town centre surveys. The number of betting shops in Clydebank has been updated following up to date town centre surveys. An amusement arcade, categorised as a betting office in error, has been removed from the count. The following changes have been made to the guidance Information on pay day lending and betting shops within local centres has been added. The number of betting offices in Clydebank in table 1 has been updated to reflect the number in the background information. Greater emphasis has been placed on National Planning Framework 4 as the most up to date part of the development plan in West Dunbartonshire. Amended the application of NPF4 Policy 27 to clarify that the cap on pay day lending and betting uses is a cap on both uses in combination. College Way has been removed from the description of the cluster in Dumbarton Town Centre, as one premises was moved from College Way to High Street. Application of Policy SC4 from Local Development Plan 2, relating to Local Centres, has been changed to place a cap on the number of pay day lending and betting shops that will be supported by the Council in Local Centres. Detailed Views and Council Responses Question 1: Is the summary of the evidence and local context within the guidance clear and appropriate? In response to this question 16 said “yes”, agreeing that the evidence and local context in the guidance was clear and appropriate and with one response stating no.
Page 4
Is there other evidence we should consider? Five respondents provided additional comments on the evidence: 1. The document reads as if the council has already made up its mind. 2. The guidance should address pay day lending and betting shops in West Dunbartonshire as a whole, not just within town centres, including Dalmuir and North Kilbowie. The guidance should consider these premises within walking distance of people’s homes and Policy 15 (Local Living and 20-minute neighbourhoods) of NPF4. 3. Addressing issues with gambling and pay day lending goes beyond the remit of planning. There is a need to identify all types of gambling in the area, such as fruit machines in pubs and restaurants and consider factors such as the age of users and cost, profit and winnings ratios. 4. The Council could limit the proportion of commercial units that are pay day lending and betting uses for example, one in 50 premises. 5. Money spent at these premises leaves the local economy 6. Gambling can cause extreme distress to families. The Council’s responses to comments 1. To ensure support for this type of planning control still exists, the council asked its Citizens Panel and found there is still support for controlling them as they are not good for community wellbeing and town centres have a high number of them. The results of the Citizen Panel surveys can be seen in the Background Information supporting the guidance. 2. The guidance targeted town centres as these locations are where the issues of number and clustering of these premises are most acute. We accept that premises in local centres may be the most accessible form of gambling and pay day lending in some neighbourhoods. We have updated the guidance and Background Information to include the level of provision in local centres to support decision making. The Council has not yet finalised an approach towards Local Living in West Dunbartonshire and will do so through the preparation of the new Local Development Plan, however the Background Information has been updated to note the locations of premises outside designated town and local centres. We also note that other policies will apply regarding planning applications for these, not just those within this guidance. 3. The Council agree that problem gambling cannot be fully addressed through planning controls as there are many different factors at play. However, the evidence suggests that easier access to gambling leads to more gambling, and that when people moved further away from opportunities to gamble, they gambled less. The guidance aims to limit the prevalence of gambling in certain locations. Licensing of betting shops is another function of the Council, under the Gambling Act 2005, and the planning team has been keeping licensing colleagues informed throughout the process of updating the guidance. Licensing does not seek to restrict gambling, instead it regulates it and indeed, permits it so far as it complies with the Gambling Act 2005. Gaming machines in pubs are authorised by virtue of a concept called
Page 5
"automatic entitlement". If a premises with an alcohol licence under the Licensing (Scotland) Act 2005 meets certain requirements, for example, it has a bar, then it can have up to two gaming machines provided it notifies the Licensing Board. It can request more, however the Licensing Board's power to refuse the additional machines is limited. 4. Restricting the proportion of pay day lending and betting shops relative to other uses was an option considered by the Council and similar approaches have been taken elsewhere. Given that town centres are currently going through a change of the types of uses within it and proposals may change the number of units (for example changes to Mitchell Way in Alexandria, and proposals for the Artizan Centre in Dumbarton) this does not necessarily provide a clear limit to the number of pay day lending and betting uses. 5. We acknowledge that betting shops are typically national chains, and that means some of the money spent there is removed from the local economy. 6. We acknowledge the distress caused by problem gambling to individuals and their families. It forms part of the rationale for the guidance. Question 2: Do you consider a cap on the number of pay day lending and betting shops within town centres to be appropriate? In response to this question 15 said “yes” agreeing that the evidence and local context in the guidance was clear and appropriate and with two responses stating no. If no, why not? Two respondents, who answered no to the question above, made the following comments: 1. Agree with the pay day lending cap, however consumers should have the freedom to choose and there is online ability of gambling irrespective of physical shops. 2. Alexandria is set at zero payday lenders. Adding one more, for a total of one, wouldn’t be overprovision. Setting it at zero highlights WDC's prejudice. The Council’s responses to comments 1. The benefits of competition are recognised, and we acknowledge the prevalence of online gambling will not be affected by this guidance. 2. The guidance is intended to address Pay Day Lending and Betting Shops in combination. The citizens panel evidence suggests both of these uses harm the character and amenity, and town centre surveys show they cluster in the same locations. It has been clarified within the finalised version that the cap applies to the combined total of these uses. Question 3: The current version of this guidance only applies to core retail areas of Clydebank and Dumbarton Town centres. This updated guidance will apply to whole town centre areas. Is this appropriate? In response to this question 16 said “yes” agreeing that the evidence and local context in the guidance was clear and appropriate and with one response stating no. If no, why not? One respondent, who answered no to the question above, made the following comments:
Page 6
1. Agree that the scope should be wider than the current guidance, however, should be widened further to include all settlements with small centres, otherwise betting shops will relocate to these locations, where the guidance has less influence. The Council’s responses to comments 1. The guidance has been revised to provide additional information on prevalence of betting shops in local centres to aid decision making. The revision also states a level of provision for these uses in local centres, beyond which applications for further provision of these uses will not be supported. It should be noted that under NPF4 Policy 27, restrictions of these uses can only be applied where “further provision of these uses undermine the character and amenity of the area or the health and wellbeing of communities”. This means guidance cannot apply a blanket restriction of these uses in all locations in West Dunbartonshire. Question 4: The current version of this guidance does not apply to Alexandria Town Centre. This updated guidance will apply to Alexandria Town Centre. Is this appropriate? All respondents answered “yes” to this question. If no, why not? There were no further comments on this question. Question 5: Is the application of NPF4 policy 27-part C clear? In response to this question 15 said “yes” agreeing application of NPF4 policy is clear, with one response stating “no”, and one respondent providing no answer to this question. If no, why not? One respondent, who answered no to the question above, made the following comment: 1. Policy 27 applies to City, town, local and commercial centres while application of this policy in the guidance narrows the focus of the policy on town centres. The Council’s responses to comments 1. The focus of the guidance is on town centres as this is where numbers of pay day lending and betting shops are highest and clustering is most acute. However, additional information has been added to the Background Information document to include the number of premises within Local Centres and a cap has also been provided on the number of these premises in local centres to provide clarity and address the concern of these uses being “pushed out” from town centres and concentrating in smaller centres, as has been raised in the answers to other consultation questions. Question 6: Have the existing clusters of pay day lending and betting shops within town centres been correctly identified? In response to this question 15 said “yes” agreeing clusters have been properly identified with two responses stating “no”. If not, can you identify other clusters that should have been included? Two respondents, who answered no to the question above, made the following comments: 1. All town, local, and commercial centres in the whole authority should be considered within the guidance, or there is risk these uses will be pushed out to smaller local and commercial centres.
Page 7
2. The number of betting shops within the wider Clydebank area has been underrepresented, with shops in Dalmuir, North Kilbowie, Yoker, and Hardgate. 3. One shop in Dumbarton has been moved. The Council’s responses to comments 1. The guidance has been updated to include further information on the prevalence of premises in local centres and elsewhere. A cap has also been provided on the number of these premises in local centres to provide clarity and address the concern of these uses being “pushed out” from town centres and concentrating in smaller centres. 2. Betting shops within the listed locations are noted and further information has been added to the guidance and background information. 3. Locations of betting shops have been reviewed to check for correct locations. The maps in the background information have been updated. Question 7: Is the application of LDP2 policy SC2 Criteria and SC3 clear? In response to this question 16 said “yes” agreeing LDP2 policies have been clearly applied with one response stating “no”. If not, how can it be made clearer? Respondents who answered no to the question above, made the following comments: 1. The terminology of these policies does not align with NPF4, making it difficult to understand. The Council’s responses to comments 1. While the policies in NPF4 and LDP2 use different language the council is not of the view that they are incompatible. LDP2 is still a material consideration, so despite the differences in terminology, the council considers it should still form part of the guidance. This section identifies where existing clusters of these uses exist, and also that additional footfall and filling a vacant unit will be lesser considerations, compared to amenity, character and health and wellbeing. In the council’s view this aligns with the policy intent of NPF4. Question 8: Is the approach to applying policy SC4 (Local Centres) in relation to pay day lending and betting offices appropriate? In response to this question 15 said “yes” agreeing clusters have been properly identified with two responses stating “no”. If no, why not? Respondents who answered no to the question above made the following comments: 1. Application of the policy in the guidance appears to be prejudiced. 2. This section of the guidance is very unclear. It needs to be made more accessible and described in plain English. The Council’s responses to comments 1. As mentioned previously, the Background information contains the views of residents of West Dunbartonshire which the Council believes justifies the restriction of Pay Day Lending and Betting Shops. 2. To provide additional clarity the guidance has been amended to place a firm cap on the number of these uses on local centres.
Page 8
Question 9: Is the application of LDP2 policy SC4 clear? In response to this question 16 said “yes” agreeing LDP2 policy SC4 have been clearly applied with one response stating “no”. If no, why not Respondents who answered no to the question above made the following comments: 1. Policy appears to promote that betting shops may be acceptable in areas outside of town centres. 2. The guidance lacks clarity, meaning it will be open to interpretation and dispute in decision making. 3. The guidance highlights that LDP2 is the council’s most up to date spatial strategy, but not that NPF4 is the national strategy. 4. NPF4 needs to be read as a whole, policies should not be isolated from one another. The Council’s responses to comments 1. NPF4 Policy 27 states that development of these premises is not supported where they undermine the character, amenity, and health and wellbeing of the area because of further provision. Currently evidence suggests that the overprovision is taking place in town centres. The section on local centres has been amended to prevent the overprovision in these locations as a result of restrictions in the town centres. It should be noted however that Pay day lending and betting shops may be acceptable in locations where there is not overprovision. 2. Majority of respondents agreed that the guidance was clear, however changes have been made for clarity, in particular to the section on local centres, where a cap has been placed on the acceptable number of these uses. 3. The section on NPF4 in the guidance has been amended to emphasize that it is the national strategy and the most up to date part of the development plan. LDP2 is still a material consideration in planning decisions, however as previously stated, the Council does not view it as incompatible with NPF4 with regard to non-retail uses. 4. The council agrees that NPF4 needs to be read as a whole in any planning decision, however the purpose of the guidance is to provide greater detail on a specific issue at a local level. Other policies and guidance will still be considered where relevant to the application in question. Question 10: Additional Comments The following additional comments were made in relation to the guidance 1. The guidance does not tackle the root cause of addiction and problem gambling. 2. Information on the usage of payday loans in the area would be interesting. 3. The claim that betting shops are not footfall generators is anecdotal and not evidenced. 4. The guidance is not based on robust evidence. 5. The cap on pay day lending and betting shops in the town centre should be more restrictive. 6. William Hill has two shops in Dumbarton. One should be made to close. If replaced by another bookmaker, it would increase competition. 7. Shops should have signs outside to provide advice to gamblers. The Council’s responses to comments 1. The council acknowledges that the guidance will not tackle all issues surrounding gambling, however the evidence suggests that greater access to gambling increases occurrence of gambling. The guidance aims to address this issue by limiting the
Page 9
number of betting offices in places where these are overprovided, and to address of the effects on character and amenity of the area. 2. The Council is not aware of the use of any data showing the use of pay day loans at a local level. 3. The Background Information document include the results of a footfall survey which took place in Clydebank and Dumbarton in 2016. These counted footfall during a weekday and a Saturday. The survey showed that betting shops offered similar footfall to retail uses. Pay day lending shops attracted very low footfall. Counts also took place in the evening to ascertain if the later opening hours of betting shops attracted significant footfall in the evening. The Council does not consider that the level of footfall attracted by these uses outweighs the impact on health, wellbeing, amenity and character of the area. 4. The Background information document contains evidence on higher numbers of betting shops within West Dunbartonshire, deprivation within the area, and the impacts these uses have on health and wellbeing. The citizens panel survey provides evidence from users of the town centres that the number and clustering of them have a negative effect on vitality of the town centre. Footfall surveys undertaken in Dumbarton and Clydebank demonstrate that betting shops do not attract significantly greater footfall than other town centre uses, and that footfall generated by pay day lenders is low. The Council considers this evidence to be sufficient in justifying restrictions on these uses. 5. The proposed cap is based on the current level of provision. The council considers this to be justified by the available evidence, mainly the views of the Citizens Panel. We do not currently believe that our evidence can robustly support a lower cap. 6. The Council is not able to use the planning system to force specific operators to close, nor could it refuse an applicant on the basis it already operates in a specific area. The planning system regulates the use of land and buildings, not the individuals or companies involved in the use. With regards to regulation through the Gambling Act 2005, any complaint around premises already operating would require to be underpinned by evidence that demonstrate that the premise is no longer operating in a manner consistent with the Gambling Act 2005. 7. Gambling premises licence holders are required to provide information through leaflets and signage on help with gambling and how to exclude yourself by the Gambling Commission's Licence Conditions and Codes of Practice. It also requires licence holders to have policies around “interactions”, where staff in gambling premises should interact with customers to identify if that customer is gambling responsibly.