Hambleton District Council Planning Application comments have been made via PublicAccess for Planning Comments regarding 15/01838/OUT were submitted at 13/09/2015 13:16:19 from Mr Peter Gardner. A summary of the comments is provided below. Application Summary Refval: 15/01838/OUT Address: Land Adjacent Cat And Bagpipes Inn, East Harlsey, , North Proposal: Application for Outline Planning Permission for construction of a single detached dwelling with all matters reserved Case Officer: Mrs B Robinson Click for further information Customer Details Name: Mr Peter Gardner Address: Baildon House, East Harsley, , DL6 2DW Comments Details Stance: Mr Peter Gardner Objects to the Planning Application Comments: Your Ref: 15/01838/OUT (outline planning permission for construction of a single detached dwelling) We are neighbours to the site and also, as volunteers, look after the war memorial which adjoins both sites. Our concerns are There has been no demonstrable need for a detached dwelling in East Harlsey There has been no demonstrable need for a dwelling in this location East Harlsey has no facilities to support increasing the existing number of properties in that ¿ There is no school, either primary or secondary ¿ There is no shop or other retail premises ¿ There is no Post Office ¿ There is no access to any form of public transport This land has been derelict for a number of years with the owners refusing to tidy it up, despite approaches by neighbours, parish councilors, district councilors and county councillors. The property has been used as a dumping ground, by the owners, for assorted materials, including old cars, an old railway carriage full of various materials and building materials. An adequate environmental assessment of the materials contained therein and the methods required to remove them safely should be undertaken. The railway wagon is certainly of the vintage where asbestos was widely used in the railway industry. The original applications, in the 1990s, were associated with the applicant being the owner of the adjacent Cat and Bagpipes public house and were associated with the need to provide accommodation related to the business. Those conditions no longer apply and should not, therefore, be consider in any way a precedent. Access to the property is only available at an existing junction and would increase the risks of accidents at this junction. Provision of access at this point would increase the risk of accidents from customers exiting the car park of the Cat and Bagpipes who currently use, and have done for over 50 years, part of this site for safe access to the road network This property will adversely affect the privacy of our property and may, in certain possible house locations on the plan, overlook rooms in our property

The application refers to a public footpath between this property and Baildon House but makes no reference to that public footpath crossing the site itself. The definitive footpath team at North Yorkshire County Council have confirmed the footpath to lie to the Cat and Bagpipes side of the stone boundary wall surrounding the War memorial and the proposed development side of a brick post on the perimeter of the War memorial banking. This lies in the site of the proposed development. No details are available in the application as to how such a footpath will be maintained. Access to the East Harlsey War Memorial is currently available to disabled people on a flat approach, with the exception of a single 6mm step. Allowing this development could prejudice such access.

The electricity supply for East Harlsey crosses the plot from an electricity pole in the North-West corner of the plot to an electricity pole at the South-East corner of the plot. This supply provides an energy source for a number of properties in the village. A development in such close proximity to an active electricity supply is not recommended on safety grounds. No acknowledgment of the existence of such a supply, suggested means of mitigating the effects by house position, redirection of supply or undergrounding the cables is contained in the application.

The totality of the concerns around this development and the number of unknown factors, many of which could not obviously be mitigated against in a full planning application, suggest that granting outline approval would be inappropriate and such factors could only be considered during a full application which discloses the true extent of any proposal and its effects.

There would be no detriment, therefore, in rejecting such an outline application.