A north Cumbrian wedding venue is likely to lose its marquee.
Dalston Hall Hotel, run by the Gilchrist Collection, asked Cumberland Council to extend permission for its temporary marquee for another two years.
It first got permission for the marquee in 2014 and now the company has asked the authority’s planners for the extension.
The application will be debated by Cumberland Council’s planning committee on January 8.
However, members have been recommended to refuse the application due to the detrimental impact it would have on its neighbours, as it has been not possible to noise being adequately controlled via planning conditions.
The application has had 26 objections over noise nuisance, traffic and access issues, discharge issues and anti-social behaviour from patrons leaving Dalston Hall Hotel.
Initially the marquee was used for around 25 to 30 events annually, mainly held on a Saturday. The increased frequency in events being held within the marquee has now exceeded what was originally anticipated and has amplified the negative impacts, the report said.
Events held at Dalston Hall Hotel between March 9 and October 30 this year received 49 separate objections from Dalston Hall Holiday Park, the report added.
It said: “It should be noted that no complaints were received prior to the erection of the marquee when events were being held solely within the main hotel building.”
In August, an investigation took place and concluded that noise disturbance continued to occur. Recorded music noise level was perceived as being over seven times louder than it should be.
The council’s environmental health department collected data on September 14 and 15, which resulted in a noise abatement notice being served on the hall on October 3.
Dalston Hall Venue Ltd has appealed the notice and environmental health officers will continue to visit the site until they are satisfied that the noise abatement
notice has been complied with.
Supporting evidence will be submitted sometime towards the end of January. Dalston Hall Hotel will then decide whether to continue with their appeal, and if they do it would be likely that the appeal would be heard sometime in April 2025, planning officers said.
Environmental health said: “There continues to be insufficient control of guests leaving the premises after events. As a result, noise nuisance from guests shouting and singing is being caused to neighbouring premises.
“The frequency of events held at the Hotel has significantly increased during 2024 and is predicted to continue to increase into 2025.
“Holding functions within the marquee will continue to result in complaints being received by this department.
“In my opinion, the sound insulation properties of the marquee structure are not sufficient to adequately contain the levels of noise required by patrons wishing
to enjoy live bands and loud recorded music, without causing nuisance to neighbouring premises.
“The maximum level of music which will not cause nuisance is unlikely to be sufficient for guests and there will be a constant pressure to increase levels during events by live bands and DJs.”
The manager of Dalston Hall Hotel said its own assessments have discovered the source of the noise. Findings suggested that it was not through the opening and closing of doors, but through the existing roofing cover on the marquee.
Cumbria police said there was no link between crime and use the marquee. However, it added, that its Neighbourhood Policing Team carried out a survey at Dalston Holiday Park and residents told them about numerous instances of anti-social and nuisance (particularly excessive noise) activity.
The report added: “Cumbria police confirmed their stance in that, from a policing perspective, it appears the continued presence of the marquee is having a detrimental effect on the quality of life of residents nearby, for which there is anecdotal evidence.”
The report to councillors said that while the marquee would continue to support an existing established rural building, its benefits did not outweigh the impact on its neighbours.
The Gilchrist Collection submitted confidential financial information to the council, but the report to the committee said: “While this information illustrates that the retention of the marquee would no doubt be beneficial in terms of capacity flexibility for the business, it can be argued not essential as the premises operated successfully before the erection of the marquee.”
The report concluded: “The current application lacks any mitigative measures or proposals to combat the objections received.”
