THIRSK AND MALTON CONSTITUENCY AREA PLANNING COMMITTEE
SUPPLEMENTARY TO COMMITTEE REPORTS
15 August 2024
Agenda Item |
Application number and Division |
Respondent |
|
2 |
ZB24/00145/FUL Hambleton
|
Consultee Response
Public Comments
Additional Information
Consultee Comments
|
Yorkshire Water commented on the 5th of August relating to the proposed drainage of wastewater. They stated that, based on the information submitted, they have no observations to make.
Yorkshire Water had also previously recommended the inclusion of the following conditions on the 21st of May:
Condition: The site shall be developed with separate systems of drainage for foul and surface water on and off site. The separate systems should extend to the points of discharge to be agreed.
Reason: In the interest of satisfactory and sustainable drainage in accordance with Local Plan Policy RM3.
Condition: There shall be no piped discharge of surface water from the development prior to the completion of surface water drainage works, details of which will have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. If discharge to public sewer is proposed, the information shall include, but not be exclusive to: i) evidence that other means of surface water drainage have been properly considered and why they have been discounted; and ii) the means of discharging to the public sewer network at a rate not to exceed 1.24 litres/second.
Reason: To ensure that no surface water discharges take place until proper provision has been made for its disposal in accordance with Local Plan Policy RM3.
Five objections (summarised and responded to below):
- Reduction of number of lodges (from 6 to 5) will make minimal difference to impact on local infrastructure (road safety, etc.) or to wildlife in the area.
- Services within Easingwold have become stretched due to development.
· Policy S3(c) identifies Easingwold as a location in which development can be accommodated due to the concentration and facilities in the town.
- The site will add to the need for road improvements.
- The location is unsuitable for holiday lodges.
· This is looked at within Paragraphs 10.1-10.4 of the Officer Report, in which Policy EG8 is discussed.
- Noise will be an issue.
· Noise impacts are intended to be managed through the discharge of conditions 9 (site management plan), 16 (construction working hours) and 17 (restriction on ancillary structures). Environmental Health have not objected and it is envisaged by them that noise impacts can be successfully managed through a final plan to be agreed via discharge of condition.
- Oulston Road suffers from flash floods and the proposal will exacerbate the issue.
· Surface water on Oulston Road is a known concern but is largely related from the land level difference between the road and the adjacent land. The proposal includes a drainage scheme which addresses the impact that the proposal will have, and which is subject to conditions requiring the drainage scheme to be considered appropriate by Yorkshire Water.
- The access is dangerous and the proposed access being closer to the brow of the hill increases risk.
· Highway safety is covered in Paragraphs 10.17-10.22 of the Officer Report. NYC Highways have not identified any immediate concerns relating to highway safety during their assessment of the proposal and conditions relating to securing highway safety (5, 6, 7 and 8) have been attached to the Officer Report.
The agent has provided evidence on the 9th of August via a percolation report that the site in incapable of accommodating sustainable drainage systems, acting as evidence to demonstrate a need to use Yorkshire Water’s sewerage system.
Environmental Health responded to
a consultation following the submission of the draft Site
Management Plan with the following comments:
- With regards to the site operator, are they planning to outsource this to an external party? Will they live locally to the site in order to deal promptly with issues? Or will it remain managed / run by the occupiers of Newlyn?
- Can they confirm what their nuisance procedure is in the event of an issue on the site?
- Will the site be advertised as a quiet site, no large groups permitted etc?
- How will they manage the bookings to ensure no large group bookings or stag/hen dos are automatically made?
- Will customers be advised at the time of booking of what the rules (control measures) of the site will be?
- Is the intention for them to have hot tubs on site now? Point 2.3 mentions Jacuzzis.
- Also, just a query regarding the max group number of 8 allowed in the lodges, is that not excessive for 2 bed lodges? I would have expected max of 6 people in a 2 bedroom lodge? ( 2 in each bedroom total of 4 and then further 2 lounge/sofa bed)?”
The Environmental Health Officer was informed that the current plan is only a draft and is happy for Condition 9 to remain attached to the report. The agent has been provided with the above comments and has been advised to incorporate them into the final version of the Site Management Plan.
|