ah was being a numpty

says target date for decision is 2/4/2011

but lookin g at all the gumph i realy cant fiqure out what there doing

On the current application documents, they give the reference number for the original application back in 2006, yet it not showing up with anything on their website?

I can make any sense of this current application, so I really want to see the original to see what condition number 4 was. I've tried searching for it but foudn nothing. Their website isn't the best really, it doesn't allow you to search by address, which makes things very hard.

This is the application reference they gave for the original application: W1125/65

-- Edited by Martyn on Friday 25th of February 2011 04:03:05 PM

^ The conditions of the amendment didn't read as if it was to do with that, but then they all seem to be in a different language.

Here is the form for this application:

http://anitepublicaccess.waveney.gov.uk/AnitePublicDocs/00069420.pdf

Go to section 6, on the second page. The amendment is explained there.

It is hard to work out, the language they use is like a bloody foreign language!lol

I cant affect the ride itself, surely. Permission has already been granted for the ride, and surely relevant tests would have already taken place.

Its really annoying that there seems no way to find the original application!

Well its waaay past the target determination date of 12th April, though a committee meeting was held on 7th June (I think)....

APPLICATION DETAILS

I still have no idea what this is for.....lol

 Edit: Here's the Consultee response (similar to what we've just recieved on the Drop Tower application)

In the Environmental Health Officer’s opinion and in the opinion of the acoustic consultants

currently engaged by the applicant, there are no further works than could be carried out to modify the Wipeout ride to bring its noise emissions to within compliance with the existing condition 4. Investigations have concluded that the ride is not complying with condition 4. 

The EHO has discussed the proposed variation with the applicant’s own acoustic consultants and agrees that the proposed new condition, expressing the noise emissions of the Wipeout as a “single event level” for a single cycle of operation of 73dB are an appropriate way of quantifying the improvements to the noise emissions of the ride secured over the last 4 years so that the SEL (of 73dB) may be incorporated in a varied condition as protection against future deterioration in the noise emissions of the ride as a result of mechanical deterioration or modifications. Thus, the “best achievable” noise performance for the ride can be secured as a n objectively assessable parameter for the life of the ride.

 

After reading that, it seems to make a bit more sense. Basically it seems Wipeout is louder than what they thought it would be, but they condition 4 to be lifted to keep it operating, and luckily the Environmental Health Officer has agreed that it will be ok to do so... thats how I (kind of) read it anyway.

 

-- Edited by Martyn on Thursday 9th of June 2011 12:18:58 PM

Blimmin' forum software! ;) (No offence Matt )

 

As for this application I can gather that PWH have sought to have a noise condition removed or amended from the planning permission as they can't physically make the ride act below this threshold. I don't understand what has happened though?

Get in, thats good news, is it on their website? Still says its pending consideration on the planning application...

-- Edited by Martyn on Friday 10th of June 2011 04:10:31 PM

Martyn wrote:

---

Get in, thats good news, is it on their website? Still says its pending consideration on the planning application...

-- Edited by Martyn on Friday 10th of June 2011 04:10:31 PM

---

 http://www.lowestoftjournal.co.uk/news/rollercoaster_at_pleasurewood_hills_in_lowestoft_to_remain_open_1_918471

 

Journal top story