Rugby club fails to lift ban on amplified music

Scarborough Rugby Club’s appeal against not being allowed to play amplified music or jingles has been dismissed.

It follows a public inquiry into Scarborough Council’s refusal to relax the restrictions, which stopped the Club playing God Save the Queen at an international game.

The rugby club based at Scalby village, near Scarborough, claims noise levels would be within World Health Organisation guidelines.

But council bosses argued any change of policy would result in residents being bombarded with “hundreds if not thousands” of jingles over festival weekends.

Now Planning Inspector Alexandra Fairclough has sided with the town hall and dismissed the appeal.

The rugby club wanted the restrictions lifted for only four weekends per year for no more than eight hours a day over two consecutive days.

But Mrs Fairclough ruled playing amplified music, jingles and other sounds would “have a serious and adverse impact” on neighbours even for this limited time.

This would “harm the living conditions of nearby residents in terms of noise and disturbance” and breach planning guidelines, she added.

The club had offered to monitor noise levels during events to check they did not go above those suggested by council bosses.

But Mrs Fairclough did not think that an assessment of average volumes would spare residents from nuisance.

“The readings proposed would not satisfactorily identify the sharp spikes of noise produced by the brief, but frequent, music, jingles and sounds,” she said.

“Those are the sounds, above which the prevailing background noise, would have an adverse impact on the nearby residents.”

During the two-day inquiry at Scarborough Town Hall last year, Roger Lancaster, for the club, underlined it only wanted to play music or jingles at special events or festivals.

He said: “There is no question of the club seeking to create a discotheque atmosphere of thudding music with intense booming base.

“These are junior rugby festivals where the actual rugby is what everyone is there for.”

But Mrs Fairclough said: “It is very likely there would a substantial number of bursts of music, jingles or sounds over the eight-hour period from 10am to 6pm.

“These would be more intrusive and disturbing than voice announcements at the same volume and would create serious agitation and annoyance to the occupiers of nearby properties.”

As reported by the Yorkshire Post, it was feared the restrictions would prevent the playing of both God Save The Queen and the Irish Rugby Anthem at a match between England Colleges and Irish Exiles in April last year.

However, with just 48 hours to go before the game, club bosses discovered a legal loophole.

While the council red tape restricted the use of the PA system to making match announcements and prohibited amplified music, there was nothing in the small print to stop a singer performing the song ‘a cappella’.

The club recruited local singer Laura Welburn, who had never sung without backing music before, and had less than a day to rehearse.

On match day, she delivered a faultless performance of both anthems while standing on a podium on the pitch in between the two teams.

It is not yet clear whether Scarborough Rugby Club will appeal against the decision.

Chief executive Graeme Young said: “We’re obviously disappointed with the outcome and I suspect there is a little surprise on all sides of the debate.

“However, it’s a long report and we’ll take our time to study it carefully.”

Scarborough Council’s Environment Scrutiny chairman Godfrey Allison, who is also a planning committee member, said no one had won in the dispute.

He added: “I was not on the planning committee when it was refused. I think maybe some reasonable arrangement could have been made.

“It is a sports field. As long as it was not blaring out at night accommodation could have been made.

“I know many of the residents were there years before the ground. But maybe there could have been a halfway house.

“Members will have mixed feelings. If they had won their appeal I would have thought ‘fair enough’.”