Ossett public pool owner to appeal against plan rejection

Up to 1,000 people have been using the swimming pool in Wakefield each month, its owner says

An entrepreneur has vowed to challenge a council's decision to refuse retrospective plans to run a public swimming pool at his home.

Wakefield Council rejected an application from Ossett Leisure over noise and traffic safety concerns raised by neighbours.

Business owner Jon Gardiner, who opened the facility in December, said he would fight the council's "unruly" decision.

The council said the application was refused on "on a number of grounds".

Mr Gardiner said he had seen huge interest amid a shortage of similar facilities locally.

The pool, on Station Road in Ossett, had been welcoming up to 1,000 swimmers a month, including schools, kids parties and disability groups, he added.

Describing the council's decision to reject his application as "appalling", Mr Gardiner continued: "They have not done their due diligence, they have categorically made an unruly decision.

"They are taking resources away and if anyone tries to replace them privately they reject it."

Wakefield Council's service director for planning, transportation and strategic highways, Joe Jenkinson, said the application was refused due to "insufficient information from the applicant about noise nuisance, concerns about vehicle parking and road safety and about the impact of the development on the conservation area in Ossett".

'Party-themed venue'

According to the Local Democracy Reporting Service, the application was supported by more than 170 people, with 60 opposing the plan.

An environmental health officer raised concerns about the facility being offered as an "upbeat, energetic party-themed venue" with disco lights and a sound system.

A report said: "The officer stated that it seems inevitable that the breakout of amplified music from this facility could cause a disturbance.

"Concerns were also raised regarding rowdy and excited behaviour from patrons, which could have an adverse impact on neighbouring residents."

The business lies within a conservation area and is close to two retirement homes.

Recommending refusal, the officer's report said: "No significant public benefits have been provided to outweigh the identified harm to the heritage asset."