The Futurist - 'Demolition'

Captain Qahn's picture

Notices have been served for plans to demolish the Futurist:

Reference: 17/01714/RG3

The application has been put forward by Scarbrough Borough Council although Councillors have been told they are not allowed to attend a meeting this week which is to be held to discuss and inform tenants and owners of neighbouring properties.  The Officers have told Councillors they will be turned away and refused admittance.

Further reports can be found via local media ;-/

"9:52am 14th August 2017

The next step is coming in the process of demolishing Scarborough's Futurist Theatre. 

A planning application is to be considered for the stabilisation of of the cliffs behind the venue. It's as the borough council presses forward with plans by Flamingo Land to build a new attraction in its place. 

The application will be considered in October, with the council stressing that it does NOT mean there will be any further debate about whether or not the venue will be demolished, because that's already been decided. 

Councillor Mike Cockerill is the member for Project Leadership at the borough council, he said:

"Planning application has been submitted for the method statement for the demolition of the Futurist and the cliff stabilisation. 

That's scheduled to go to a planning committee in October. This doesn't re-open the debate as to whether the Futurist is to be demolished or not.

That decision has been taken. 

This isn't scary, it's a controlled process. yes, some of the nearby residents are concerned about their properties, and they have every right to be say"


"It should be noted that this planning application is for the demolition, slope stabilisation and
reinstatement only. It does not relate to any future redevelopment proposals for the site."

A good measure ;-)

Ah, So  ...

hmmm ...





Captain Black's picture

The Orinoco Flo

"Now, the Trust is calling for the council to change its mind, something that it feels is possible while the structure still stands. 

The Theatres Trust was set up in 1976 as an act of parliament 'to promote the better protection of theatres.'

The Futurist is on its 'theatres at risk' list and the trust opposes the demolition because 'the development will result in a complete loss of cultural facility without the provision of a replacement facility or plans for an appropriate alternative cultural use.'

The letter also states that by demolishing the Futurist, the borough council is actually going against its own Local Plan, which was adopted in July 2017, which provides policies to 'safeguard and promote cultural facilities to ensure there is a strong cultural tourism sector in Scarborough.'

Plenty of wishful thinking ;-)

Darned Sats ..

Yawn ...

Captain Qahn's picture

The Futurist & Hold Ups

Benefitz Betty's picture

Futurist A Float

The 'F' world :

Ground Investigation Report: P27

"Most of the installations recorded variations in water level of less than 1m throughout all phases of monitoring ... however BH2 had a very deep response zone and recorded a range of 10.59m over the time it was monitored. The levels changed fairly abruptly between readings, with around 10m change being recorded over a 2 week period..This indicates active recharge of the deep glacial sand/gravel following periods of heavy rainfall."

"Global stability of the existing and proposed slope is predominantly dependent on the strength properties of the Glacial Till coupled with piezometric conditions (groundwater regime). Small changes in strength and groundwater assumptionscan cause significant changes in the calculated global factor of safety on the slope."

No mention of salvage & reclaimations.

Not quite sure who will be on the 'committee' given recent party seat shuffling... mebbe they ought to do a parkies job.


Benefitz Betty's picture

Futurist - An Eye Sore

"... In the application documents it is highlighted that the National Casework Planning Unit has written to the council to confirm that a formal request to intervene on the Futurist Theatre application has been made. This means that should the Planning Committee decide to approve the application on Friday  the Local Planning Authority has to agree not to issue a final decision until the Secretary of State has had the chance to consider the application for call-in.

The planning document accepts that the application does not comply with the guidance set out in the National Planning Policy Framework regarding future use of the site but goes on to explain that council officers feel separating the demolition plans from the future use plans is necessary to enable regeneration of the site..."

High Scores?

"Seaside towns in England and Wales - and the young families living in them - are suffering the worst levels of debt in the country, new figures reveal.

The Isle of Wight has the highest level of insolvencies amongst young adults, according to the Insolvency Service, followed by Torbay and Scarborough.

Overall the number of 18 to 34 year-olds becoming insolvent rose by 31.3% between 2015 and 2016.

It comes ahead of a possible rise in interest rates as soon as next month.

Any increase would be the first in the UK for over ten years - and would inevitably make borrowing more expensive... "

its like Bingo for the blind, innit.

Has anyone mentioned job creation?

pssst ""At one point, to survive, we had chickens. We were living off eggs. Just eggs, bread and milk, because that's all we could afford," says Daniel.

How Now,  about that KFC ... hell no anything but


Handbags at the ready ...


Benefitz Betty's picture

Futurist In Fluents

"3:56pm 17th October 2017

The £3.91 million for demolishing Scarborough's Futurist Theatre has been approved.

The council's cabinet has today accepted a report on the costings of knocking the building down and stabilisng the cliffs behind it.

On Friday, a decision will be made on whether or not to give planning permission to the method of knocking it down.

But there's been confusion and disagreement over who's had access to the report, with some councillors claiming not to have been given the information...."


Under the influence ;-0



Benefitz Betty's picture

Toad in the Hole

"6:31am 20th October 2017

It will be decided today whether or not Scarborough's Futurist Theatre can be knocked down.

A committee at the borough council will approve or decline a planning application to demolish the site.

There have been concerns about a lack of detailed costing information, after the cabinet approved a within-budget figure of £3.9 million pounds earlier this week.

The council's received 77 responses to the application, 74 of which have been against it...

"Below are the minutes of public questions and answers heard at the Cabinet meeting this week, the responses are in bold.


The Chief Executive reported that Ms Shirley Sheppard had registered to ask a question in respect of Agenda Item 10, Demolition of the Futurist Theatre, adjoining buildings and stabilisation of the cliff.  The questions with corresponding answers (in bold) provided by Councillor Cockerill are set out below.

Questions part 1

The final cost for the demolition of the Futurist Theatre and adjoining buildings including stabilisation is £3.913m, howeverthere is no full breakdown of these costs within the report.

  1. Which councillors have been presented with the comprehensive breakdown of this latest full cost?
  2. If so when did they receive this? 

A cost summary was presented to the Major Project Board on 9 October 2017 which Councillor Cockerill attended.  Since then, this information had been shared with all Cabinet Members.

  1. In the aim of openness and transparency would Cabinet please advise SBC that nearby residents have a copy of this breakdown immediately, so as to be able to compare it with previous costs before any decision is made? 
  2. If Cabinet deems this unallowable, can they defend the late publication of this document which does not allow one time to apply through the necessary ‘freedom of information’ channels.

We believe this to be of utmost importance as in previous tables many costs were not included in the main breakdown.

The detailed costs remain commercially sensitive. However, we accept that the design is of most importance to nearby residents and businesses, hence the consultation events which have taken place including through the planning process.

  1. Have councillors been presented with the possible costs of these things not included?
  2. If so what is the total of these costs?

All costs for the demolition and stabilisation works are included.  There are no known other costs.

  1. Have preliminary costs that have already been incurred been included in this £3.9m breakdown?

Yes, they have.

  1. Does this cost breakdown still include the cost saving, but noisy, plan of ‘crushing on site’ instead of using the old gas works site?


  1. If so is the cabinet aware that these so called low noise crushers are ‘outside the jurisdiction of noise controls’?

The contractor will be required to comply with all noise control legislation.

  1. Can this cutting of costs be justified when around 60 residences will be affected by this noise?

Yes, as during the finalisation of any scheme my officers work with prospective contractors to see if there are benefits of any kind – financial, time, disruption etc- which can be achieved by the decision to keep the crushing on site.

 Questions part 2

The risk matrix states that claims for compensation for damage to buildings from adjacent owners is  C3- Likely of medium impact.

  1. Are the councillors aware of which properties have been included in the ‘Schedule of condition of properties’   to be conducted?
  2. My business at 9 Blands Cliff has received  notification, but our home at number 6, only 20m further up the cliff has not.
  3. Due to the stacking nature of all of the buildings up the steep Cliff, does the cabinet think this is a fair appraisal of the properties that will be affected?

It is the contractor, experienced in such work, who decided which properties are visited.  Further consultations have been undertaken through the planning process.

Questions part 3

The risk matrix states in 5.12.16 Disruption to sea front businesses caused by demolition programme over a full year  is. A3- Very Low of medium impact

  1. Why have the two business at the bottom end of Blands Cliff not been include? (They are at more risk as with such activity and noise visitors are very unlikely to want to walk up the cliff, or visit premises close to the noise).

The two properties were either issued with a party wall notice or invited to a drop-in session.  However, the risk register will be changed to state disruption to ‘neighbouring’ businesses as well.

The meeting at the Town Hall takes place this afternoon - stay with us and we'll keep you informed of the result as it happens.

Should Scarborough's Futurist Theatre be knocked down?"

Silk purses at the ready ;-)

Coup de Ville ...

Cracker Jacks.

Mind ... never underestimate the consumer ;-0


Hmmmm  ... tis an Ed's n Tails job, innit.