18/04765/OUTMAJ 1

Case No. 18/04765/OUTMAJ Item No. 02

Location: Crimple House Farm, Hornbeam Park Avenue, Harrogate, HG2 8QL.

Proposal: Outline application for the erection of 10 dwellings with access to the

site considered.

Applicant: Mrs S Hullah

Access to the case file on Public Access can be found here:- view file

Reason for report: This application is to be presented to the Planning Committee

following a request by the Ward Councillor on the grounds that the proposal raises

significant / controversial / sensitive planning issues. The purpose of the report is to

seek the views of the Committee on the proposal in the light of an appeal against

non-determination.

SUMMARY

Given the “significant weight” attractable to the emerging local plan, the application

site being beyond the development limit is a significant negative feature

strengthened notably by the harm caused to the public right of way within the Special

Landscape Area and the overly intensive nature of the proposal harming residential

amenity. The proposal consequently fails to achieve the social and environmental

strands of sustainable development and would have been recommended for refusal.

RECOMMENDATION: That permission would have been refused

18/04765/OUTMAJ 2

18/04765/OUTMAJ 3

18/04765/OUTMAJ 4

1.0 SITE DESCRIPTION

1.1 The site lies within the Crimple Valley Special Landscape Area to the east

side of Hornbeam Park Avenue beyond the commercial properties on

Hornbeam Square South from which trees and shrubs provide a degree of

screening.

1.2 Fronting Hornbeam Park Avenue is a pair of existing cottages. To the north

of these an access serves those properties as well as leading to a group of

barns and, beyond those, a farmhouse. The access also forms the initial part

of a bridleway, the Harrogate Ringway, which runs to the north of the barns

and links to the showground to the east and Hookstone Drive to the north-

east; slightly to the south on Hornbeam Park Avenue this bridleway extends

west to Fulwith Mill Lane and is a designated cycle route in its entirety.

1.3 The barns have permission for residential use involving some demolition and

the cessation of an extant agricultural contracting use on land and in the

structures that are to be demolished which form part of the site area of this

application.

1.4 To the south, a row of tall trees provides substantial screening to the car

park to Gardner House, an office building immediately north of St Michaels

Hospice. These two properties’ are situated beyond a wooded area through

which the highway forms a loop to the end of Hornbeam Park Avenue.

1.5 The application site extends to the edge of the bridleway and to the south is

inset from the boundary by the root protection area of the trees, and includes

the widening of the access from Hornbeam Park Avenue.

1.6 The application is subject to an appeal against non-determination. The

purpose of this report is to seek the views of the Committee on the proposal

and establish the local planning authority’s position at the appeal.

2.0 PROPOSAL

18/04765/OUTMAJ 5

2.1 Outline planning permission is sought for 10 dwellings (indicated as four 2

bed and six 3 bed) with access considered. Originally, layout was also a

consideration but was subsequently made a reserved matter, along with

appearance, landscaping and scale.

3.0 APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING INFORMATION

3.1 The application is supported by the following documents:

Design and Access Statement

Ecological Survey

Preliminary Geoenviromental Investigation

Transport Statement

Tree Survey

4.0 RELEVANT HISTORY

4.1 15/00440/FUL Conversion of barn to create 1 dwelling. Approved

28.04.2015

4.2 18/04766/FUL Conversion of barn to form 3 no. dwellings. Withdrawn

01.04.2019

4.3 19/00998/PBR Prior notification for conversion of agricultural building to form

3 no. dwellings with associated building works. Permitted Prior Notification

30.04.2019

5.0 NATIONAL & LOCAL POLICY

5.1 National Planning Policy

5.2 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) sets out the Government’s

planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied.

Planning permission must be determined in accordance with the

development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The

National Planning Policy Framework is a material consideration in planning

decisions.

18/04765/OUTMAJ 6

5.3 At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable

development.

5.4 Core Strategy

Policy C1 Inclusive communities

Policy EQ1 Reducing risks to the environment

Policy EQ2 The natural and built environment and green belt

Policy SG1 Settlement Growth: Housing Distribution

Policy SG2 Settlement Growth: Hierarchy and limits

Policy SG3 Settlement Growth: Conservation of the countryside, including

Green Belt

Policy SG4 Settlement Growth: Design and Impact

Policy TRA1 Accessibility

Policy TRA2 Transport infrastructure

Policy TRA3 Travel management

5.5 Harrogate District Local Plan (2001, As Altered 2004)

Policy C2 Landscape Character

Policy C9 Special Landscape Areas

Policy HD13 Trees and Woodland

Policy R11 Rights of Way

Policy HD20 Design of New Development and Redevelopment

5.6 Emerging Harrogate District Local Plan

Policy CC1 Flood Risk and Sustainable Drainage

Policy CC2 Rivers

18/04765/OUTMAJ 7

Policy CC3 Renewable and Low Carbon Energy

Policy CC4 Sustainable Design

Policy GS1 Providing New Homes and Jobs

Policy GS2 Growth Strategy to 2035

Policy GS3 Development Limits

Policy HP2 Heritage Assets

Policy HP3 Local Distinctiveness

Policy HP4 Protecting Amenity

Policy HP5 Public Rights of Way

Policy HS1 Housing Mix and Density

Policy HS5 Space Standards

Policy NE2 Water Quality

Policy NE4 Landscape Character

Policy NE5 Green Infrastructure

Policy NE7 Trees and Woodlands

Policy NE9 Unstable and Contaminated Land

Policy TI1 Sustainable Transport

Policy TI3 Parking Provision

Policy TI5 Telecommunications

18/04765/OUTMAJ 8

5.7 Supplementary Planning Documents

Green Infrastructure

Biodiversity Design Guide

Biodiversity Action Plan

Landscape Character Assessment of Harrogate District

House Extensions and Garages Design Guide

Residential Design Guide

Provision for Village Halls in Connection with New Housing Development

Provision for Open Space in Connection with New Housing Development

5.8 Other material policy considerations:

Planning Practice Guidance

6.0 CONSULTATIONS

6.1 NYCC Highways And Transportation – Advise a footpath is required

outside the frontage of the development and shall measure at least 2.0

metres in width. The carriageway must be a minimum width of 5.5 metres.

Requests that any approval includes conditions in respect of detailed plans

of road and footway layout, and parking for dwellings, and an informative

regarding no obstruction of the bridleway.

6.2 Police Architectural Liaison Officer – Raised a number of issues

regarding design and layout matters which fall outside of the scope of this

outline application.

6.3 Yorkshire Water – Do not object; request appropriate conditions be

attached to any approval.

6.4 Economic Development Officer – Objects. Not a draft allocation for

housing; were it to be developed it would be located to the rear of the town’s

18/04765/OUTMAJ 9

key employment hub. Consider any development of the land should be for

employment purposes as an extension to the existing business park. Notes

office accommodation in particular is in short supply in the Harrogate District

and particularly in Harrogate Town. Since May 2013 21% of office stock has

been lost (or has received notification to lose) via permitted development

rights. Therefore, if there is an opportunity to extend the key employment site

in Harrogate, it should be taken. Businesses on Hornbeam Park that are

closest to the site employ circa 400 people (3500 people are employed on

the site in total) and often need to work 24 hours a day. They are some of

the fastest growing businesses in the town and should this development be

permitted it could give rise to future residents complaining about

noise/activity from those businesses and we know from previous examples

that even though the businesses were there before the residents, this has

little bearing with regards noise complaints.

6.5 To reiterate, this is the key employment site in the district and integral in the

delivery of the Economic Growth Strategy e.g. the provision of good quality

office / industrial space (note the Matrix Development that is near completion

on site), provision of inward investment opportunities and an enabler of good

quality, well paid jobs.

6.6 Environmental Health Officer – Does not object. Notes the submitted

preliminary geoenvironmental investigation report identifies risks associated

with agricultural contracting business and the presence of asbestos.

Intrusive investigation prior to development is concurred with; the sampling

to include areas to be used for gardens. More information and a more

thorough risk assessment associated with the potential for landfill gas also

needs to be carried out. Request an appropriate condition be attached to any

approval.

6.7 Housing Department – Advise the Housing and Economic Development

Needs Assessment calculates a need for affordable rented housing of 208

per annum across the Harrogate District. Priority for the affordable homes

will be given to those with a local connection to the sub area.

18/04765/OUTMAJ 10

6.8 Harrogate Bridleways Association & British Horse Society - Object. Do

not accept the bridleway being incorporated into the access road which

means a loss of safety of a largely traffic free route and loss of amenity value

for users of the bridleway. We would want to see it placed to the north of the

access road and separated from public motorised vehicular traffic. The

applicant owns the land between the access road and the northern boundary

with Hornbeam Park and there is ample space for the bridleway to be

located to the north of the proposed development access road in its own

green corridor before it then picks up the definitive line to the north of the

gardens as shown on the proposed layout.

6.9 Ramblers Association – Object. Making the first length of bridleway, a very

popular route for ramblers, dog walkers, cyclists and horse-riders, off

Hornbeam Park Avenue a tarmac road will urbanise this promoted route

from Hornbeam Park Rail Station to the Yorkshire Showground. The

Harrogate Ringway, the bridleway, needs to be away from the road.

Approaching the houses the view from the bridleway will be urbanised to the

detriment of enjoying this rural surroundings. High fences to gardens will

reduce the public amenity of the bridleway. Consider the proposal could be

acceptable if houses were not as close to the bridleway, if the house

gardens were not in close proximity to the bridleway, and if no section of the

bridleway was shared with the access road.

7.0 OTHER REPRESENTATIONS

7.1 Letters of representation received from 51 authors opposed to the

development raising cumulatively the following matters:-

Major impact on vital green space and bridleway well used by locals for

walking and recreation

Green wedge to be preserved on edge of Crimple Valley

Open countryside beyond development limits

Profit at expense of valued landscape.

Urbanise bridleway

Little if any affordable houses contribution

18/04765/OUTMAJ 11

Potentially denser density

Slope stability issues on site

Result in Flooding of a beck

Lead to further development of land beyond

Harm to wildlife

Loss of agricultural land

Special Landscape Area no landscape assessment

Unnecessary infilling

Incompatible with business park; noise - 7am alarm, reversing noises,

smell, access, late working, access. Untenable, tensions between home

owners and businesses

Incompatible additional pressure on already full schools, doctors and

dentists

No bus service to Hornbeam Park; train station and Leeds Road bus

stops distant and unattractive walk

Already excessive parking; limited parking provision

Traffic congestion / pollution including construction work; Hornbeam Park

Avenue, Hookstone Road. Leeds Road, Wetherby Road. Needs separate

access

Could result in further speed restrictions on Hornbeam Park Avenue

Office accommodation lost in town - any development should be an

expansion of the business park

7.2 Reference is also made to an online petition with “over 163 signatories”.

7.3 Four letters of support received cumulatively raising the following issues:-

Prefer sympathetically designed houses to progressively derelict farm

buildings that occasionally attract anti-social behaviour and people

sleeping rough.

Existing residential site; proposals are small 2 /3 bed houses suitable

for young first time buyers and those downsizing.

Opposed to an extension of business park up to existing dwelling.

18/04765/OUTMAJ 12

Infant and Secondary Schools and amenities (cafes, restaurants,

leisure facilities) accessible without a car; train station with easy

walking distance.

Houses would keep rural landscape more than the large tarmac areas

and security fences needed by any employment building on the site,

and which would lead to more traffic at peak times.

Natural infill between Hornbeam Business Park, Gardner House and

St. Michaels Hospice and sits within the curtilage of the existing

farmstead.

Vehicle movements associated with 10 dwellings would be negligible

and unnoticeable in reality.

Not detrimental to the bridleway nor impact on the natural habitat.

Secluded and bordered by large mature trees to the hospice and

Gardner House with no view of the Crimple Valley; view from the

Bridle Path is already restricted by the existing arrangement of barns

and outbuildings.

8.0 ASSESSMENT

8.1 The main issues in the consideration of this application are as follows: -

Social Sustainability – Housing Land Supply, Affordable Housing,

Services, Healthy Communities

Environmental Sustainability – Landscape, Effect on Public Right of

Way, Amenity - impact on existing and proposed residents, Heritage,

Highways, Trees and Ecology, Flood Risk, Foul and Surface Water

drainage, Loss of Agricultural land.

Economic Sustainability.

Planning Balance and Conclusion

8.2 Sustainability

8.3 Achieving sustainable development is a key purpose of the National

Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), and proposals for sustainable

development should be approved without delay. There are three strands to

18/04765/OUTMAJ 13

sustainability, social, economic and environmental. These are discussed

below in conjunction with sub-paragraphs contained within each strand.

8.4 SOCIAL SUSTAINABILITY

8.5 Housing Land Supply

8.6 The NPPF requires local planning authorities to identify and update annually

a supply of specific deliverable sites sufficient to provide a minimum of five

years’ worth of housing against their housing requirement with an

appropriate buffer. It is considered that the council has a 6.89 years land

supply as of April 2019. For the purpose of determining planning applications

it is therefore the Council’s position that there is a five year supply of

deliverable housing land and, whilst this needs to be maintained with further

approvals where appropriate, the presumption in favour of sustainable

development in Paragraph 11 of the NPPF is not triggered on the basis of

the land supply position alone.

8.7 However, the Council’s adopted policies for the supply of housing contained

within the current Local Plan/Core Strategy and associated development

limits are out-of-date and can be given no more than limited weight. This

means that Paragraph 11 of the NPPF and the presumption in favour of

sustainable development is engaged on this basis. The paragraph states

that development proposals should be approved unless policies in the NPPF

that protect assets of particular importance provide a clear reason for

refusing the development proposed or any adverse impacts of doing so

would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed

against the policies in the Framework taken as a whole. This is known as

the tilted balance.

8.8 Paragraph 48 of the NPPF advises that increased weight can be given to

emerging local plan policies as they progresses towards adoption. Case law

establishes that it is for the decision maker (the Council) to decide what

weight to apply to any particular factor. In light of the ‘significant’ weight that

can be given to the emerging local plan (which includes development limits

18/04765/OUTMAJ 14

that meet the housing needs of today and the future), alongside a healthy

land supply position this does materially impact on the ‘tilted balance’.

8.9 The site lies beyond the development limit for Harrogate, as it did under the

terms of the out-of-date development plan. The current relevant draft local

plan policy, GS3, is only permissive of housing development beyond a

development limit in locations where there are not any housing allocations in

the settlement and there is a lack of a 5 year housing land supply.

8.10 Consequently, the location beyond the development limit together with the

other identified harm weighs significantly against the proposal in terms of

social sustainability.

8.11 Affordable Housing

8.12 Given the location of the site beyond the development limits for Harrogate as

set out in both the development plan and the emerging local plan there is a

requirement under saved Local Plan Policy H5 for affordable housing of on-

site provision if more than ten dwellings are proposed, or a financial

contribution for provision elsewhere if between three and ten dwellings are

proposed.

8.13 As the barn conversion to three dwellings has been agreed under a prior

notification under the terms of The Town and Country Planning (General

Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015, as amended by The Town

and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England)

(Amendment) Order 2018), that element of the overall element of the site

does not require any affordable housing contribution, as that Central

Government Order does not seek any such contribution. Therefore, this

proposal has to be assessed as requiring a financial contribution rather than

any on-site provision. In the event of the proposal being supported this would

be a matter for a Section 106 Agreement.

8.14 Services

18/04765/OUTMAJ 15

8.15 Policy C1 of the Harrogate Core Strategy 2009 requires that proposals for

the use and development of land will be assessed having regard to

community needs within the District.

8.16 The site, in comparison to the wider suburbs of Harrogate, is located within

relatively close proximity of a number of facilities, immediately adjacent

employment opportunities and is some 730m distant from Hornbeam Park

railway station. Whilst not wholly ideal this is comparable to a number of far

larger developments elsewhere and their relationship with bus stops. A

largely half hourly service connects with destinations including Harrogate,

Knaresborough and Leeds.

8.17 Whilst representations concerning schools being at capacity are noted, there

is no assessment necessary for this application because the requirements

for contributions towards the improvement of education facilities applies to

developments of twenty-five or more dwellings.

8.18 The site is accessible and sustainable in terms of its location and

relationship with services in the wider settlement.

8.19 Healthy Communities

8.20 The NPPF advises (Paragraph 91) that the planning decisions should aim to

achieve healthy, inclusive and safe places which promote social interaction

and are safe and accessible.

8.21 The Police Designing out Crime officer provides advice at this outline stage

and does not oppose the development.

8.22 Core Strategy Policy C1 requires that proposals for the use and

development of land will be assessed having regard to community needs

within the District. Relevant Supplementary Planning Documents for this site

relate to the provision of open space and village halls in connection with new

housing development. This is a matter that can be progressed through a

legal agreement should the proposal be supported.

8.23 Conclusion on Social Sustainability

18/04765/OUTMAJ 16

8.24 In terms of social sustainability the location of the site beyond the

development limit for Harrogate carries significant negative weight.

8.25 ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY

8.26 Landscape

8.27 Core Strategy Policy SG4 requires that visual amenity is protected and that

the environmental impact and design of development conforms to Policies

EQ1 and EQ2. The latter is the more relevant here as it seeks to ensure that

the District’s exceptionally high quality natural and built environment is given

the level of protection it deserves.

8.28 Saved Local Plan Policy HD20 requires new development be designed with

suitable landscaping as an integral part of the scheme.

8.29 Saved Local Plan Policy C2 is a more general policy, having a requirement

that development should protect existing landscape character. Related to

this policy is the Supplementary Planning Guidance contained in the 2004

Harrogate District Landscape Character Assessment; the site falling within

Character Area 58 Middle Crimple Valley, which is stated as being

influenced by the urban edge but with little built form within it except for

several scattered farmsteads, and is highly valued by local residents. The

capacity to accept change which would not result in coalescence is limited.

Impacts on the landscape character and wildlife habitats of Crimple Valley

and Stone Rings Beck should be fully assessed and the footpath network

enhanced.

8.30 Saved Local Plan Policy C9 relates to land that is locally designated as

being a Special Landscape Area including “the Crimple Valley from the

Follifoot to Knaresborough Road in the east and Beckwithshaw in the west”

covering a large section of the southern fringes of Harrogate. The policy

does not automatically preclude development in a Special Landscape Area.

It does oppose development that has an adverse impact on the character of

the landscape or the landscape setting, in this instance of Harrogate; and

18/04765/OUTMAJ 17

states that where development is permitted high standards of design,

including landscape design and, where appropriate, measures to mitigate

the impact of development will be required. Paragraph 170 of the NPPF

requires valued landscapes to be protected and enhanced.

8.31 Whilst the site is within the Crimple Valley Special Landscape Area it is not

physically itself in the valley but rather beyond the northern slopes of the

valley and secluded from the valley; on which the presence of St Michaels

Hospice and Gardner House are far more readily evident. In terms of the

wider local landscape the proposal does not have a harmful effect.

8.32 Effect on Public Right of Way

8.33 Saved Local Plan Policy R11 states that rights of way and the opportunities

they afford for informal recreation should be retained. Developments will not

be permitted that cause harm to the character or recreational and amenity

value without a satisfactory diversion

8.34 The public bridleway passing the site forms a pleasant route from Fulwith

Mill Lane to the showground or the junction of Hookstone Drive, Hookstone

Road and Oatland Drive. The stepped crossing required across Hornbeam

Park Avenue being a harsh interruption into the generally pleasant

surroundings. The commercial premises on Hornbeam Square South are

evident but nevertheless acceptably buffeted by trees and shrubs. The barns

on the site are more of an imposition however the agreed scheme for the

conversion of the slightly more distant stone barns is subject to a condition

requiring prior to any occupation the remainder of the barns and associated

structures being removed from the site and all business activity ceased.

8.35 The proposed development would be in sharp contrast bringing domestic

activity as well as the dwellings up to the bridleway and the change in the

access to a fully adopted highway. Diversion of the bridleway to the side of

the highway would result in the removal of a number of trees and shrubs and

consequently further urbanise the environs though the lesser extent of

screening of the adjacent commercial properties.

18/04765/OUTMAJ 18

8.36 The proposal causes harm to the character, recreational and amenity value

of the bridleway and in doing so harms the immediate surroundings of this

part of the Special Landscape Area.

8.37 Amenity - impact on existing and proposed residents

8.38 A high standard of amenity for all existing and future users is an objective

contained with the NPPF (paragraph 127). This is embodied in saved Local

Plan Policy HD20, which requires development to protect the privacy and

amenity of neighbouring residents and occupiers of adjoining buildings, and

Core Strategy Policy SG4, which requires development to protect and where

possible enhance residential amenity.

8.39 A dwellinghouse is recognised as being a noise sensitive development. As

such, the potential occupiers of any dwelling should enjoy a satisfactory level

of amenity. There is a single dwelling, the original farmhouse to the west,

semi-detached cottages to the west and an office building to the south east

albeit well screened. Industrial units lie to the north and north-west beyond a

public right of way with a degree of screening - these are occupied by a

variety of uses including a ventilation systems manufacturer and window

company with their service yard closer than the requisite buildings. Other

nearby uses include a gas engineers and, to the west, a Climbing Centre.

8.40 The proposal will create a residential dwelling close to commercial uses and

thus any occupier would be aware of the possible noise from the surrounding

land uses. The presence of the existing dwellings indicates that residential

properties can coexist in close proximity with the business park.

8.41 The Environmental Health Officer nevertheless requires a condition to be

attached to any approval to ensure that any dwellings are adequately

insulated from noise.

8.42 The end use of the development site as residential dwellings would not be

expected to give rise to in-principle concerns relating to noise generation for

existing residents. This is not an inherently noisy land-use. Construction on

18/04765/OUTMAJ 19

the other hand does create noise, and the NPPF also notes the need to

mitigate and reduce to a minimum potential adverse impacts resulting from

noise from new development – and avoid noise giving rise to significant

adverse impacts on health and the quality of life (paragraph 180).

Limitations should consequently be imposed on hours of work in the terms of

any permission.

8.43 Dust generation can also be problematic to neighbouring residents during

construction and the in the event of any permission being granted developer

will be expected to submit by condition a dust mitigation strategy to minimise

the effect of this on existing residents and the wider environment.

8.44 There are concerns over the indicative layout given the haphazard

relationship of the parking spaces with the properties they are meant to

serve. Whilst layout has been withdrawn from consideration the issue is

raised whether the proposal is an overly intensive development of the land.

Ten dwellings on a site of 0.46 hectares is 21.7 dwellings/ hectare and not

by itself an issue. Part of the site is, however, taken up by the stone barns

and excluding these and the part of the site that is access only reduces the

site to 0.33 hectares; 30 dwellings / hectare.

8.45 Thirty dwellings per hectare is stated as being the minimum net density by

the emerging Local Plan Policy HS1, but with the comment that where it can

be demonstrated that development at such densities would be detrimental to

local character or amenity, or site constraints would prevent these densities

from being achieved, then development may be permitted at a lower density.

8.46 The Council’s House Extensions and Garages Design Guide is an adopted

supplementary planning document in support of saved Local Plan Policy

HD20. Aimed primarily at householder development, its annexes do provide

guidance on separation distances between dwellings to maintain residential

amenity, which is equally as relevant to new residential development and the

reserved matter details subsequent to any approval of this application would

be expected to conform to those specified distances.

18/04765/OUTMAJ 20

8.47 Policy HD20 requires new buildings to make a positive contribution to the

spatial quality of the area and their siting should respect the area’s character

and layout.

8.48 The site is constraints by the stone barns and the slope of the land towards

the public bridleway; the latter may be addressed through level changes but

nevertheless this together with the barns constitutes a notable constraint on

the developable ability of the site. The indicative layout shows properties

facing the main rear elevation of the barns 15m distant whereas 18-21m

would normally be expected, and other properties 4m from a gable end

where 12m would be the norm.

8.49 It is consequently difficult to judge how 10 dwellings could be acceptably

accommodated on the site; a matter which is the role of an indicative layout

and which the submitted document wholly fails to achieve. The proposal is

consequently considered to be an overly intensive development of the site

which would unreasonably reduce the level of residential amenity which any

occupier of the proposed dwellings, including those provided by the

conversion of the barns.

8.50 Heritage

8.51 The NPPF sets out that the effect on a non-designated heritage asset has to

be taken into account (Para.197). The stone barns along with the farmhouse

and Crimple Cottages are such assets and the proposed development would

cause less than substantial of harm to their setting.

8.52 Highways

8.53 Paragraph 108 of the NPPF requires sustainable transport modes to be

taken up, given the development and its location, safe and suitable access

achieved for all users. Development should only be prevented or refused on

transport grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway

safety, or the residual cumulative impacts on the road networks would be

severe.

18/04765/OUTMAJ 21

8.54 Policy SG4 of the Core Strategy states that the travel impact of any scheme

should not add significantly to any pre-existing problems of access, road

safety or traffic flow and should have been fully addressed in accordance

with Policies TRA1, TRA2 and TRA3 of the Core Strategy.

8.55 Policy TRA1 encourages the reduction in the need to travel and seeks to

improve accessibility to jobs, shops, services and community facilities.

8.56 Policy TRA2 requires that development of a site should maximise the

opportunity to improve accessibility to key services and facilities.

8.57 Policy TRA3 identifies areas where the Council will work with the County

Council and other transport providers to implement measures to reduce

traffic congestion and improve accessibility to jobs, shops, services and

facilities.

8.58 North Yorkshire County Council, as the Local Highway Authority do not

oppose the development. The vehicles generated by ten dwellings would be

negligible in the wider context.

8.59 Trees and Ecology

8.60 A detailed arboricultural method statement and impact assessment along

with ecological mitigation measures would be required as part of any

reserved matters application. Bats are known to be present and requisite

consent from Natural England will be required in respect of the separate

development of the barns

8.61 Flood Risk, Foul and Surface Water drainage

8.62 Core Strategy Policy EQ1 requires all new development to minimise flood

risk.

8.63 As with any new green field development on surface water will be required to

be discharged at a restricted rate to avoid flooding. The land is in Flood Zone

1 and hence the least likely to be at flooding risk. Both surface water and foul

sewers are available nearby.

8.64 Loss of Agricultural Land

18/04765/OUTMAJ 22

8.65 The application proposes the development of agricultural land. The NPPF

advises that where ‘significant’ development of agricultural land is deemed to

be necessary, authorities should seek to use areas of poorer quality land in

preference to that of a higher quality. ‘Significant’ is not defined within the

Framework, although appeal decisions do indicate that this scale of

development is not ‘significant’ even if the land were to of high quality.

8.66 Conclusion on Environmental Issues

8.67 Para.8 of the NPPF indicates, amongst other thing, that the planning system

needs to contribute to protecting and enhancing the natural built and historic

environment. The proposed development would be a locally significant over

intensive expansion beyond the development limit without overriding

justification for such that would adversely harm the character, amenity and

recreational value of a public right of way set in a Special Landscape Area.

8.68 ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY

8.69 It is acknowledged that the development of new housing has economic

benefits, through the employment created on site during the construction

phase of development and work created for the construction supply chain.

Residents would support local services.

8.70 Conclusion on Economic Issues

8.71 The proposed development has some economic benefits.

9.0 PLANNING BALANCE & CONCLUSION

9.1 Given the “significant weight” attractable to the emerging local plan,

paragraph 48 of the NPPF is material in terms of that framework and the

'tilted balance' is changed such that the application site being beyond the

development limit is a significant negative feature strengthened notably by

the harm caused to the public right of way and the overly intensive nature of

the proposal within the Special Landscape Area. The proposal consequently

fails to achieve the social and environmental strands of sustainable

development and the harm demonstrably outweighs the benefits of the

18/04765/OUTMAJ 23

proposal such that it does not represent sustainable development. This is a

material consideration, which weighs against the proposed development.

9.2 The proposal also would not accord with the development plan.

9.3 There are consequentially no material considerations of sufficient weight to

warrant the planning permission being granted.

9.4 The application would have been recommended for refusal.

10.0 RECOMMENDATION

10.1 That the application would have been REFUSED on the following grounds

1) That the proposed site lies beyond the development limit for Harrogate

set out in the emerging Harrogate District Local Plan and due to the

number of dwellings proposed and the constraints of the site would

represent an overly intensive development of the site harmful to

residential amenity and the amenity and recreational value of the

adjacent public right way and the Special Landscape Area contrary to

Policies EQ2 and SG4 of the Harrogate District Core Strategy and saved

policies C9, HD20 and R11 of the adopted Harrogate District Local Plan.

In the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee's decision

(such as to delete, vary or add conditions/informatives/planning obligations or

reasons for approval/refusal) prior to the decision being issued, the Chief Planner has

delegated authority to do so in consultation with the Chairman of the Planning

Committee, provided that the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the

Committee's decision.

Case Officer: Mike Parkes Expiry Date: 14 February 2019