KIRBY HILL & DISTRICT PARISH COUNCIL
(Incorporating:
Kirby Hill, Milby,Thornton Bridge, Humberton and Ellenthorpe)
MINUTES of a special planning meeting of the Parish Council 17 December 2007 6.45pm in the Coronation Hall prior to the Public meeting called by the council at 7.30pm to enable public discussion of item 4.1 below.
1.0 Present
Cllr Smailes (Chairman), Cllrs Helliwell, McKenzie, Merson, Parr, Renfrew, Widdows, Wilkinson
2.0
Apologies for Absence
Cllr Lister
3.0 Declarations of interest
None
4.0
Planning
4.1
NY/2007/0301/FUL
Commercial/Industrial Waste
Transfer/Recycling Operation
Cllrs discussed the final draft of the Council’s response to NYCC Minerals and Waste Planning Dept.
Cllr Helliwell proposed that the response now be sent off and this was seconded by Cllr McKenzie and agreed unanimously by the Council. Cllr Lister, unable to attend the meeting, had notified the Clerk prior to the meeting that she was in agreement with the final version of the response being dispatched to Northallerton. Response text attached below.
ACTION CLERK
4.2
6.57.30.D.FUL
Conversion of barn to form 2 flats and associated garages [revised scheme – garages roof]
The council supported this revised application. Clerk to notify HBC Planning ACTION CLERK
5.0 Public Meeting
Cllrs discussed with the clerk and chairman the arrangements for the public
meeting about to start in the adjacent room.
The meeting ended at 7.10pm SIGNED……………………………Chairman
Text of Parish Council Response to Minerals And Waste Planning, Northallerton, regarding Waste Transfer/recycling operation in Old Goods Yard, Milby
26 St John’s Walk
Kirby Hill
Boroughbridge
North Yorks
YO51 9DJ
17 December 2007
Mike Convery
Minerals and Waste Planning
Development & Countryside Service
NYCC County Hall
Northallerton
DL7 8AH
Dear Mr Convery
PLANNING APPLICATION
ref NY/2007/0301/FUL
WASTE TRANSFER & RECYCLING OPERATION OLD STATION
YARD MILBY LANE BOROUGHBRIDGE
The Kirby Hill and District Parish Council, in whose area the Milby site subject to this application is situated, has considered the Application and wishes to make the following comments.
The Council regards the site as unsuitable for this kind of development which results in so much heavy vehicle movement due to the bulking and onward transfer of waste.
It considers that there are alternative sites that would not impact on residential property and public amenity in the way that would happen at this site, nor cause the traffic and access problems that the Milby site presents.
The Council also understands that North Yorkshire Minerals/Waste ‘preferred options’ report considers this site to be suitable for an indicative maximum of 20,000 tonnes throughput per annum. And while the Council has already objected to that lower level it notes that this application is for 100,000 tonnes throughput pa.
The Council’s particular comments and objections are as follows:
The application mistakenly refers to there being only one singular dwelling to the East whereas the farm has now been converted to two family dwellings and there are 10 further dwellings just east of those.
The Council considers that policy 5/3 of the North Yorkshire Waste Local Plan would not be met in so far as there would be an unacceptable impact on the local amenity which is the Coronation Hall.
The Council considers that policy 4/14 of the North Yorkshire Waste Local Plan will not be met in so far as there would be an unacceptable effect on the setting of the historic battle site and on the setting of the Boroughbridge conservation area.
It is noted that there would be very high levels of noise emanating eastwards from the crushing machinery at the eastern end of the site and that these would be mitigated to some extent by the mounds of waste on the eastern side of the crushing shed. This is regarded as totally unacceptable. Large mounds of waste cannot be regarded as a fixed feature and even if they were they would be unacceptable from the point of view of visual impact and impact on the open country landscape.
The Parish Council would also like to comment on the credibility/accuracy of some of the documentation accompanying the application. The number of errors concerning properties close to the site indicates that the quality of the research generally, and therefore of the findings, is questionable. Errors include the following:
Robinson Geo Engineering Report Sec 3 Environmental Setting
The list of businesses within 250m of the site does not include the Russell
Hume Meat Processing factory. A footnote refers to ‘anecdotal evidence’
of a meat processing factory
Transport Assessment
Page 7 – list of companies sharing same access does not include the
Boroughbridge Brick & Tile Co
Page 8 – Anchor Inn listed as a public house nearby but not the Grantham
Arms which is very much nearer
Noise Assessment
Page 7 – states that there is a singular dwelling 300m to east of site whereas there are two family dwellings here
Page 8 – states that Canal Side is the nearest dwelling on the east side of Milby Lane, whereas Walnut Cottage is in fact nearer
Yours sincerely
Gerald Smailes
Chairman
Martin Rae
Parish Clerk
01423 322886