Thank you for your interest in this story
To continue reading this article, subscribe to the Stray Ferret for as little as £1 a week
Already a subscriber? Log in here.
31
Oct
'We need infrastructure': Bishop Monkton residents grill developer over 60-home plan
Residents in a Harrogate district village have demanded that adequate infrastructure is put in place before any further housing is built in the area.
At a packed public meeting last night, villagers in Bishop Monkton grilled representaives from Avant Homes over a proposed plan to build 60 new homes on a site off Moor Road.
The developer previously withdrew a proposal for 88 houses on the same site in May 2023.
There have long been fears in Bishop Monkton, which lies three-and-a-half miles south of Ripon, that the village’s sewerage system does not have the capacity to cope with the extra houses, as human waste can be seen on local streets after even “moderate” rain.
During the meeting last night, Chris Megson, the developer’s planning manager, and technical director Jon Birkin, fielded questions from sceptical residents.
The site layout for the 60-home plan in Bishop Monkton.
Mr Megson gave a 15-minute presentation during which he admitted there had been “fundamental issues” with previous applications.
However, it was during the proceeding question and answer session that residents demanded that an adequate drainage system be put in place in the village before any further housing was built.
One resident, who had lived in Bishop Monkton for decades, pointed out that foul drainage and surface water were the key problems in the village — and had already been pointed out during a previous application for 23-homes in the area.
He said:
I’m not against more housing, in fact I’m for it. We need younger people in the village. But the housing needs to be appropriate and the infrastructure needs to be in place.
'Victorian system'
On multiple occasions during the public meeting residents pointed out to Avant Homes that the current drainage and sewerage system in the village is “Victorian”.
However, much of the concern over a lack of investment in the system was directed at Yorkshire Water, which were not present at the meeting.
Regardless, Bishop Monkton Action Group issued a statement prior to the meeting summing up the concerns over drainage.
The group said:
Our existing village drains put the surface water (run off from roofs and drives etc) together with the foul water (waste from loos and washing machines etc) and duct them together to the local water treatment plant in the same pipe. Modern developments have two pipes for this purpose but ours are historic and hence combined.
When it rains heavily, or persistently, the pipes cannot cope with the volume from these two sources. In the past manhole covers have lifted to release sewage onto the streets There is considerable concern in the village that the new development, with foul water from 60 homes, will add to these problems.
In response to the concern, Mr Birkin said Avant had already taken note of the drainage and sewage issues from previous applications.
He said:
We know there is a lot of concern. We have seen all of the publicity that was going on with the [previous] scheme. We understand that there are concerns.
During the meeting, residents gave multiple recommendations over surface water drainage, highways amendments and road layout changes.
Tony Garnett, a former Bishop Monkton councillor, asked Mr Birkin whether Avant would take any of the recommendations made and alter their plans.
In response, Mr Birkin urged those present to offer recommendations through the planning department at North Yorkshire Council by commenting on the proposal.
He said:
It would be foolish to come here tonight and not listen to what has been suggested.
0