HARROGATE BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE – AGENDA ITEM 6: LIST OF PLANS. DATE: 13 June 2017
PLAN: 01 CASE NUMBER: 16/05647/EIAMAJ GRID REF: EAST 440595 NORTH 456828 APPLICATION NO. 6.500.281.EIAMAJ DATE MADE VALID: 11.01.2017 TARGET DATE: 12.04.2017 REVISED TARGET: CASE OFFICER: Mr Andy Hough WARD: Ribston
VIEW PLANS AT: http://uniformonline.harrogate.gov.uk/online- applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=OJ27XLHYKIM00
APPLICANT: Forward Investment LLP
AGENT: Addison Planning
PROPOSAL: Outline application for development of business park with access considered.
LOCATION: Land At Flaxby South West Of The Junction Of The A59 And A1M
REPORT
SITE AND PROPOSAL
The application site is located at land to the south west of the junction of the A59 and A1(M) motorway at Flaxby and extends to some 40 hectares in area. The site comprises two arable fields to the western half of the site abutting the motorway to the west and A59 to the north. Flaxby Covert woodland comprises the eastern section. The woodland comprises the existing access road served from the A59 roundabout to the immediate north of the former Donnelly’s factory unit. The woodland is protected by Tree Preservation Order.
There is a large wetland area within Flaxby Wood to the east of the site access. The industrial building to the south west of the site is heavily screened by woodland with a bund separating the building from the Harrogate to York railway line. This line forms the south west boundary of the site. The two arable fields to the western portion of the site are sub- divided by a dyke flowing west and low managed hedgerows. The A59 and A1 (M) form the site boundary to the north and west respectively with the highway intersection elevated above the low-lying fields.
The applicants seek outline planning consent with all matters reserved except for the principle of the development proposed and the means of access to the site. Other matters of appearance, landscaping, layout and scale are reserved for future consideration. The purpose of the planning application is to establish the principle of a business park and how the access will be accessed. The application is accompanied by a set of parameter plans, which indicate how the site will broadly be developed with defined parameters within which detailed layouts will be considered as part of the reserved matters stage.
The application site itself forms a significant tract of land. However, of the 40 hectares within the site area only 13.8 hectares will be set for new employment development. 3.3 hectares will be allocated for a new rail halt and park and rail facility with the remaining 23.4 hectares involving the retention and enhancement of the existing woodland area, new road infrastructure and new landscaping areas.
In terms of the proposed new employment areas, the applicants identify that the proposal is to establish up to 53,882sqm of employment use falling within the ‘B’ category of the Use Classes Order (B1a Offices, B1b Research and Development and B1c Light Industrial uses). Ancillary uses are also proposed for up to 2,787sqm of potential provision of facilities such as a gym and/or Creche (D2) and small scale retail and cafes (A1 and A3) are included.
The final layout details of the site are reserved for subsequent approval, however, a parameter plan has been submitted for approval to specify the development framework relating to land use and open space. This specifies development envelopes at the site and the land uses that will be considered within them, it also specifies the key access routes and open spaces within the site.
The scale parameters plan and design code identifies that the object of the proposal is not to create a single homogenous character to the area, but to provide a basis for high quality design. Massing and building heights are identified in the character zones section of the Design Code. The applicant has identified differing height parameters for each zone, so as to relate to boundary conditions and retention of viewing corridors within the site. The final appearance of the buildings is reserved for subsequent approval.
A Green Infrastructure Parameters plan is submitted, which has informed the masterplan. The applicant identifying that the masterplan has resulted in a landscape-led proposal.
Access is considered for approval at this stage and the applicants identify that this will be taken from the A59 via the existing roundabout constructed to serve the neighbouring golf course/hotel site. A new roundabout will be provided within the site to provide separate direct access to the proposed park and rail and business park. The new roundabout and access road through the woodland are to be constructed in accordance with North Yorkshire County Council specification.
The site is remote from existing urban areas with the nearest settlement of Flaxby located approx. 0.5km to the north-west. The site has a mixed arable and woodland character, with the woodland covering approximately 50% of the site.
New Inn Farm is located south east of the site on the southern side of higher land known as Bayram Hill. To the north east of the site on the opposite side of the A1(M) and A59 is Allerton Park, a registered Historic Park and Garden (Grade II Listed). The Gardens are mid C19 and provide a setting for the Grade I listed Allerton Castle with surrounding parkland that was laid out in the early C18. On a knoll in the Near Park to the north west of the main House stands the Grade II* listed Temple of Victory from where there are expansive views over the parkland and surrounding countryside. The A1(M) / A168 defines the west boundary of the 205ha registered Historic Park and Garden.
THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a process by which information about the environmental effects of a project is collected, evaluated and taken into account in its design, the decision as to whether it should be granted consent, and how it is subsequently to be built, operated and dismantled should consent be forthcoming. The developer presents the information on the project and its environmental effects in an Environmental Statement (ES).
The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 2011, (EIA Regulations), list developments for which EIA is mandatory (Schedule 1 developments) and those for which the need for EIA is judged by the local planning authority (Schedule 2 developments). The decision for Schedule 2 developments is made on a case-by-case basis depending on the significance of potential environmental effects.
In this instance and following guidance contained within the Regulations, the applicants recognised that an EIA was required for the development and the scheme was progressed on that basis with the preparation of an ES.
In accordance with the EIA Regulations a formal scoping opinion was sought from the Council in June 2016 in order to ensure that the ES contained all relevant information to evaluate the environmental effects of the proposed development. The Council responded to the scoping request in October 2016.
MAIN ISSUES (1) Land Use Principle (2) Socio Economic (3) Transport And Accessibility (4) Landscape And Visual Impact (5) Ecology (6) Heritage (7) Amenity (8) Flood Risk And Drainage (9) Ground Conditions (10) Other Matters
RELEVANT SITE HISTORY 90/01058/OUT – Outline application for a large scale business or industrial development for occupation by a single large operator and any related development directly linked to its operation. Land Comprising 61.12 Hectares Located In The South-West Quadrant Of The A1(M)/A59
Called in by Secretary of State on 15 08 1995 and refused.
CONSULTATIONS/NOTIFICATIONS Swale And Ure Drainage Board (Includes Claro) Provided that the proposal is carried out in accordance with the submitted drainage strategy the Swale and Ure Drainage Board have no objections.
ARKENDALE PARISH MEETING (78) See representations
H.B.C Land Drainage No objection, subject to the imposition of the condition recommended by the Local Lead Flood Authority
NYCC Highways And Transportation No objection subject to the imposition of conditions and a S106 to cover highway matters
Landscape Officer The submitted Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment presents a fair prediction of the likely impacts that the development would have on landscape character and visual amenity. The development will have a large scale adverse impact, although these impacts will reduce as the landscape mitigation becomes more effective in filtering views. The large percentage of the overall site retained as woodland cover and proposed structural/screen planting will greatly assist in this process. Should the council be minded to approve the application a dimensioned landscape parameters plan should be submitted detailing minimum distances of all planting zones.
Conservation and Design Section See assessment
Principal Ecologist Identifies that the supporting ecological information, with particular reference to breeding birds will require additional survey work. The remaining survey work in relation to bats and Great Crested Newts is considered sufficient to demonstrate that mitigation can be provided through conditions.
NYCC Lead Local Flood Authority (SuDS) No objection subject to the imposition of a condition to secure detailed proposals for surface water drainage.
Environmental Health Noise The revised noise planning report which has been submitted by Hydrock, reference C16 1369-ACO-EJ-20160721.PO3, dated July 2016 is considered acceptable. The author of the report states that specific ventilation and façade designs will be needed for each specific building on site once the detailed stage is reached. This will take into account the findings of the noise map and design levels in BS8233:2014. A further noise report should be submitted at the detailed stage to cover the points above.
Demolition and Construction Plan Recommend a condition to secure a demolition and construction plan.
Land Contamination Recommend the standard Ground Contamination condition. Air Quality Mitigation measures will be required.
Lighting The lighting scheme for the development should be designed to minimise light pollution and prevent light spillage. Although the separation distance to the nearest dwellings is large. It is still recommend that the applicant be required to submit details of any floodlighting to be provided at the detailed stage. This would be subject to a condition.
Planning Policy See Assessment
DCS Arboricultural Officer There is no Arboricultural objection to the proposed loss of the trees in order to facilitate the installation of the highway and cycle path. The number of trees lost should be replaced at a minimum rate of 2:1, which should be incorporated in to a wider woodland management plan for the site.
Ramblers Association - Mr Andrew Willoughby The Ramblers Association do not object to this development. It seems to not unduly affect the valuable woodland, and will not have a serious effect on the use of the bridleway.
The bridleway crosses the access road immediately south of the new proposed roundabout and users will have to cross the road with increased traffic movements. Can the design of this proposed roundabout include a safe crossing point with a central refuge suitable for a bridleway? This needs to be large enough for pedestrians, horses and bicycles.
Footpath Officer - NYCC The plans show there is a Public Bridleway that passes through the development site and crosses through the currently proposed roundabout or 'new access' point. This can be addressed by diverting the Public Bridleway. Alternatively, the roundabout could be re-sited several metres northwards to avoid the conflict between the Public Bridleway and the proposed roundabout.
The issue of the proposed road crossing the Public Bridleway is not in itself a problem. However, the volume of vehicular use will need to be considered. Good visibility and suitable surfacing materials to ensure a safe crossing point for users of the Public Bridleway will be required. Technical advice can be obtained from North Yorkshire County Council Public Rights of Way maintenance team on specifications.
Historic England The proposed development will affect the setting of several designated heritage assets. Historic England is primarily concerned regarding the impact on The Temple of Victory, Grade II* listed building and Allerton Park, Grade II Registered Park and Garden. The urbanisation of the proposed site through creation of a Business Park would cause harm to the rural setting to these heritage assets which contributes positively to their significance. Historic England do not consider that the justification for the new development outweighs the harm to the heritage assets caused by it and therefore object to the application on heritage grounds. Natural England Soil and Land Quality The development falls outside the scope for the Development management Procedure Order (as amended) consultation arrangements. The proposed development would not lead to the loss of over 20 hectares of the 'best and most versatile' agricultural land. Though the site is 40.5 ha, it is recognised that more than half of the land affected by the development will remain undeveloped (for example as retained woodland, habitat creation and landscaping. In order to retain the long term protection of the land and to safeguard soil resources as part of the overall sustainability of the development, it is important that the soil is able to retain as many of its functions and services as possible through careful soil management. Recommend that the Guidance in Defra Construction Code of Practice for the Sustainable Use of Soils on Construction sites is followed. This can be attached as an informative.
Economic Development Officer The Economic Development Unit welcome this substantial investment in creating a high quality, accessible employment site in the district.
Highways England Recommend that conditions should be attached to any planning permission that may be granted together with a legal agreement. Highways England have placed a holding order on the application until 27th July, until outstanding issues are addressed. Whilst issues relating to J47 of the A1(M) have been finalised and agreement has been reached Highways England wish to retain the order in place until the application is potentially approved in principle and heads of terms for the legal agreement are agreed.
Yorkshire Water No objection subject to the imposition of conditions
Heritage Unit of NYCC The application includes an archaeological desk based assessment and the results of a geophysical survey. The site has archaeological potential and further trail trenching should take place to investigate this. This evaluation should be undertaken prior to determination of the application. The applicants have subsequently undertaken Trial Trenching and NYCC Heritage Unit have confirmed that there is no objection to the development.
Ainsty Internal Drainage Board The site for this development falls outside the Ainsty Internal Drainage Boards District. There are no Board maintained watercourses in the vicinity: as such it is not considered that the proposal will have a material effect on the Boards operations.
ALLERTON MAULEVERER-W-HOPPERTON P C (95) See representations
FLAXBY PARISH COUNCIL (102) See representations
Harrogate Bridleways Association No comments received RELEVANT PLANNING POLICY NPPF National Planning Policy Framework SPGLAP Supplementary Planning Guidance, Landscape Character Assessment of Harrogate District SPGLND Supplementary Design Guidance, Landscape Design Guide LPE04 Harrogate District Local Plan (2001, as altered 2004) Proposal E4, New Industrial/Business Allocations CSEQ1 Core Strategy Policy EQ1: Reducing risks to the environment LPHD7A Harrogate District Local Plan (2001, as altered 2004) Policy HD7A, Parks & Gardens of Historic Interest CSSG1 Core Strategy Policy SG1 Settlement Growth: Housing Distribution CSSG2 Core Strategy Policy SG2 Settlement Growth: Hierarchy and limits CSSG3 Core Strategy Policy SG3 Settlement Growth: Conservation of the countryside, including Green Belt CSSG4 Core Strategy Policy SG4 Settlement Growth: Design and Impact CSEQ2 Core Strategy Policy EQ2: The natural and built environment and green belt CSJB1 Core Strategy Policy JB1: Supporting the Harrogate District economy CSJB3 Core Strategy Policy JB3: Land for jobs and business CSTRA1 Core Strategy Policy TRA1: Accessibility CSTRA2 Core Strategy Policy TRA2: Transport infrastructure CSTRA3 Core Strategy Policy TRA3: Travel management LPHD20 Harrogate District Local Plan (2001, as altered 2004) Policy HD20, Design of New Development and Redevelopment LPHD13 Harrogate District Local Plan (2001, as altered 2004) Policy HD13, Trees and Woodlands LPE08 Harrogate District Local Plan (2001, as altered 2004) Policy E8, New Industrial and Business Development in the countryside LPC02 Harrogate District Local Plan (2001, as altered 2004) Policy C2, Landscape Character LPS04 Harrogate District Local Plan (2001, as altered 2004) Policy S4, Shopping in the Countryside LPT11 Harrogate District Local Plan (2001, as altered 2004) Proposal T11, Park and Ride LPT20 Harrogate District Local Plan (2001, as altered 2004) Policy T20, Bus Access LPT22A Harrogate District Local Plan (2001, as altered 2004) Policy T22A, Measures to promote cycling
APPLICATION PUBLICITY SITE NOTICE EXPIRY: 10.02.2017 PRESS NOTICE EXPIRY: 09.02.2017
REPRESENTATIONS GOLDSBOROUGH AND FLAXBY PARISH COUNCIL: Objects to the development - see Appendix 1
ALLERTON MAULEVERER-W-HOPPERTON PARISH COUNCIL: Requested additional time to comment on the proposal, no further correspondence received.
ARKENDALE PARISH COUNCIL: No comments received.
OTHER REPRESENTATIONS 10 letters received on the following grounds;
1. Land should be retained as agricultural land. 2. The Ecological benefits seem to be exaggerated. The woodland is existing. It seems that the planning application has appropriated the adjoining existing woodland in order to provide an apparent area of green space associated with the development, rather than providing any within the site itself. 3. Concern regarding the potential loss of a pond within the site and whether fishing rights would be retained for the angling club that currently use the site. 4. The Council’s economic growth strategy has not been published. The application should not be determined until such time that it is. 5. The Atkins Employment Land Review 2015 only identifies the site as most suitable, as it exists, close to the A1(M) and the owner wants it. There must be numerous other sites that meet the planning criteria for industrial development. 6. Claims that the site will ‘benefit’ from planned improvements to junction 47 are totally spurious, as those plans only seek to address existing congestion. The development will add congestion along with the new settlement proposed to the north. 7. The development would be contrary to HBC Policy TRA1, which seeks to reduce the need for travel. 8. In proposing a rail halt the applicant is seeking more favour than the application deserves. The applicant is only in a position to make space available for this but nothing more. There is no published feasibility study relating to the development of a rail halt. 9. A Park and Rail scheme will only add more congestion to the site. 10. The development will harm a valued landscape. 11. Increased light pollution. There are no lights on J47 because of the presence of the Grade I Listed Allerton Castle. Following the same argument there should be no lighting on this site. 12. Because of the cumulative negative impact of the proposed new settlement and the Flaxby Green Park, the developments should not be assessed in isolation but together and only when the EGS has been published. 13. The local community (Flaxby residents) have not been properly consulted/involved in the development of any proposals for this site, which appears to conflict with the values set out in the Localism Act. 14. The Council's Heritage & Placemaking document states that developments should "Recognise the contribution of the natural environment including biodiversity, landscape and green infrastructure". This proposal contravenes this policy statement. There would be large adverse landscape effects if the overall site was developed. 15. There is a continually emerging evidence base highlighting the impact of pollution on health, and on greenhouse gases. NYCC's draft transport plan states that 'As expected, the A1(M) is the source of the highest levels of carbon emissions, as this is a highly trafficked road'. The risks of living and working near areas of high pollution (i.e. the A1M as set out by NYCC) are well recognised and articulated by NYCC. It is unclear why it would be appropriate to consider developing housing and employment schemes directly adjacent to the most significant source of carbon emissions in North Yorkshire. 16. Poor impression of approach into Harrogate /Knaresborough. 17. The development presumably is to provide new jobs for the new settlement, without which there would be no requirements for the park. Other than via a pedestrian access by tunnel under the A59, alternative access by car would only add to the congestion caused by industrial and business traffic so close to a main junction. The proposed Rail Halt, whilst providing a point of access to the industrial estate, would be too far away from the "settlement" to be used by its inhabitants. So the proposed "Park and Ride" would be to a limited and expensive advantage to a few workers from outside the area. 18. Previous application was turned down by the secretary of state in the 1990’s, nothing has changed since then. 19. Site is of local significance as a nature reserve. 20. Harrogate is a rural town not an industrial heartland, this overdevelopment should be stopped now.
One letter received commenting that:
1. Although fully supporting the need for further employment for our Borough, which will roll- out a welcome increase to the local economy, we are opposed to this development unless the local infrastructure plans to support the increased demands this development will place upon the A59 are taking into account not just this development but also the yet to be seen impact of the AWRP coming on-line and the potential of a New Settlement of 3,200 homes being sited on the A59.
Harrogate Civic Society have responded as a representation noting that:
In their response to the Draft Local Plan Consultation, they gave support to a new settlement in order to provide relief from some of the pressure that the housing requirement is having and will have around Harrogate. Of the two possible new settlements, they favoured Flaxby – housing site FX3 along with the employment site FX4.
Unfortunately it will not be possible to find large new sites that will please everyone. They see that Historic England is concerned about the visual effect that this employment site would have particularly on and from the Temple of Victory and Allerton Park. As a Civic Society one of their prime concerns is the heritage and history of our area. Looked at purely from the Historic England perspective then, for the area to remain entirely rural would be the correct outcome. However, it may be necessary to achieve a compromise for the sake of Harrogate town and to an extent other parts of our district. Historic England does not have to make this choice and they naturally conclude that the benefits of the new development do not outweigh the harm to the setting of local heritage assets.
Although in general they support the development of FX4 for employment along with FX3 for housing, they urge the most sensitive mitigation means possible.
These should include –
• Buildings of modest scale.
• Keeping building heights low.
• Much soft landscaping including substantial trees.
• Colourings of all aspects of the development must be sensitive to the rural location. • Materials should reflect those already in the landscape and better still replicate them as much as possible.
• A layout that maintains the most sensitive views.
VOLUNTARY NEIGHBOUR NOTIFICATION
The Applicants have submitted a statement of community involvement (SCI) identifying pre- application discussions with Ward Members and Officers of the Council and Key Stakeholders.
A public consultation drop-in event was undertaken. Letters were sent to local residents explaining details of the proposals and questionnaire was provided. Details of the various meetings are included within the SCI and include: Goldsborough and Flaxby Public Exhibition (26 July 2016) Knaresborough Town Council (12th September 2016).
A leaflet drop was undertaken to every household in Flaxby and Goldsborough inviting residents to a drop-in event at the Bay Horse Public House in Goldsborough on 26 July 2016. The applicants identify that more than 100 people attended the drop-in event and were given an opportunity to provide consultation responses by post e-mail or questionnaire. 8 responses were received, the nature of issues raised can be categorised as issues relating to the principle of the business park, access and transport impacts, design, existing woodland and landscaping, ecological issues and construction management.
ASSESSMENT OF MAIN ISSUES
(1) LAND USE PRINCIPLE Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires that planning applications are determined in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
The Development Plan comprises: a) the Harrogate District Core Strategy Development Plan Document, which was adopted on 11th February 2009, superseding a number of policies of the Harrogate District Local Plan, and forms part of the Local Development Framework, setting out the vision and the strategic policies for development and conservation in the Harrogate District up to at least 2021; and b) saved policies of the Harrogate District Local Plan (adopted February 2001) incorporating Selective Alteration (adopted May 2004);
Policies contained within the Development Plan that are considered relevant to the proposal are the saved Harrogate District Local Plan Policies E4 and E8.
Policy E4 identifies new industrial and employment allocations across the district but following the withdrawal of the Site and Policies DPD, this policy is considered out of date and carries little weight.
Policy E8 deals specifically with new industrial and business development in the countryside; this policy offers support for new industrial development in the countryside subject to meeting several criteria, highlighted below; a) it involves either: i) the re-use or adaptation of an existing building, a proposal for farm diversification or other small-scale proposal requiring a countryside location for operational reasons; or ii) small-scale new building adjacent to a rural settlement, which is well related to the settlement, benefits the local economy, and reduces the need for increased car commuting to urban centres. b) it is either well located in relation to the classified road network or would not generate significant volumes of traffic. c) it would not have a significant adverse effect on the character, appearance or general amenity of the area.
The site clearly cannot be considered small scale, however regard has to be taken of the Economic Land Review (ELR) and the emerging local plan, see below.
Core Strategy policies relating to employment provision that are considered relevant are identified as:
Core Strategy Policy JB1. This policy provides a basic commitment to maintain and enhance the economic role of the district and support innovation and enterprise.
Core Strategy Policy JB3. This policy seeks to maintain a good range of employment sites and provide for some 45 hectares of new employment land over the plan period.
Core Strategy Policy SG3 deals specifically with development in the countryside and identifies that strict control will be exercised over new development in accordance with national planning policy aimed at protecting the countryside. The policy does however identify that in order to promote a sustainable pattern of rural development, certain forms of development will be encouraged. Such development includes small-scale employment proposals.
In November 2013, the Council submitted its Sites and Policies DPD (SPDPD) for Examination. The plan was submitted on the basis that it delivered the Council’s adopted Core Strategy. In April 2014, following the commencement of the examination hearing sessions, the Inspector wrote to the Council to set out his concerns regarding a ‘substantial shortfall’ in the amount of housing being planned for and that the Council’s employment land evidence base is out of date.
Taking into account the issues raised by the Inspector, Members decided to withdrawn the SPDPD from Examination at a meeting of Full Council on 18 June 2014.
The resulting impact is that Core Strategy Policy JB3, which sought to direct the majority of employment land towards the district larger settlements and only some 5.02 ha to the rural east of the district can in consideration of the proposed development, only carry limited weight as the evidence base to justify both the quantum and distribution of new employment land is out of date.
In terms of the location of new employment land, Local Plan Policy E8 should be used as well as the NPPF paragraphs detailed below to determine the application. In essence, if the applicant can show that it is sustainable economic development as stated by the NPPF then paragraph 14 of the NPPF is applicable and consent should be forthcoming unless any adverse impacts would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of the scheme.
Following withdrawal of the SPDPD the Council has started to progress the Local Plan. Although the policies within the emerging local Plan do not yet carry any weight at this stage, they do indicate the direction of travel of the Council. Emerging Local Plan Draft Policy EC1 does identify the proposed site as a potential key employment site (Site FX4 – the application site).
Core Strategy Policy SG4 is applicable to all development proposals in the district and seeks to ensure that, amongst other criteria that development is appropriate to landscape character; visual, residential and general amenity is protected and wherever possible enhanced; the environmental impact and design of development should conform with Policies EQ1 and EQ2.
In addition, Policy SG4 seeks to ensure that the travel impact of any scheme should not add significantly to any pre-existing problems of access, road safety or traffic flow, having been assessed against the Transport policies of the Core Strategy. In respect of this latter point the applicants have submitted a transport statement and travel plan in support of the development.
At the national level, the National Planning Policy Framework (2012) sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied. It sets out the Government’s requirements for the planning system. The National Planning Policy Framework must be taken into account in the preparation of local and neighbourhood plans and is a material consideration in planning decisions.
At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development.
The introduction of the NPPF has not changed the legal requirement that applications for planning permission must be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The policy guidance in Annex 1 to the NPPF is that due weight should be given to relevant policies in existing plans according to their degree of consistency with the NPPF. The closer the policies in the plan to the policies in the Framework, the greater the weight that may be given. The NPPF encourages economic development for all types of businesses in rural areas, including new buildings.
Where development plan policies are out of date the NPPF advises that planning permission should be granted unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies of the framework taken as a whole.
It is noted that employment land can be placed under pressure from alternative uses and therefore it is important for the well-being of the local economy to secure the long term future of a range of employment opportunities. The council has undertaken a District Employment Land Review (ELR) to inform the employment land requirement to 2035.
Atkins were commissioned to undertake an Employment Land Review Study on behalf of Harrogate Borough Council in order to analyse the future demand for employment land in the District to 2035. The employment land demand-supply analysis of the ELR clearly demonstrates that the Harrogate District has an undersupply of employment land up until 2035. It recommends that the Council considers making allocations in the order of 20-25ha. The key rationale to this recommendation is as follows:
• While Harrogate is projected to have an oversupply of industrial land, it is unlikely that surplus industrial sites will have the qualitative characteristics to meet the future needs of B1 businesses in particular. Therefore, the Council will need to provide new, good quality sites for B1 and B8 use. • It is possible that some of the existing B1 and B8 stock will be lost to non-B class uses over the coming years, as both B1 and B8 sites are subject to permitted development rights that grant prior approval for residential re-development. Therefore, in addition to meeting new B1 and B8 requirements, an allowance needs to be made for the replacement of lost stock. • For the local economy to operate efficiently, there is a need to provide businesses, developers and investors with a sufficient degree of choice and flexibility in the employment land market. Without reasonable choice, there is danger that businesses will choose to locate in areas outside the District • Harrogate is subject to significant constraints in the supply of employment land which is threatening the scope to accommodate the expansion needs of existing local businesses. • At present, there are no significant site options for major inward investment opportunities. In the interests of encouraging local economic diversification and prosperity, it is important for the Local Plan to offer at least one significant opportunity site or location.
The ELR identifies that there is scope over the period of the plan to 2035 to bring forward new allocations of land for employment purposes to address the shortfall for B1a/b and B8 purposes and to create a better balance in the type of employment land available. It goes on to conclude that this should include at least one significant site to enable the expansion of indigenous companies and offer inward investment opportunities. Flaxby has been identified as the most appropriate location for a strategic employment allocation as it has excellent access to the strategic transport network and will benefit from planned improvements to Junction 47 of the A1(M) (Site FX4). The ELR identifies that “the site presents an opportunity to provide a high quality, landscaped ‘green business park’ which focuses on high quality business use and has potential to provide a major inward investment site to meet the identified needs in the Harrogate District.”
The current proposal is for the development of this site.
The NPPF is a material consideration in consideration of the proposal. Paragraph 17 sets out the core principles and identifies that as an overarching principle, decision taking should pro- actively drive and support sustainable economic development to deliver homes, business and industrial units, infrastructure and thriving local places that the country needs. Every effort should be made objectively to identify and then meet…..business and other development needs of an area, and respond positively to wider opportunities for growth.
In addition, paragraph 17 identifies that development should contribute to the conservation and enhancement of the natural environment with allocations of land for development being focussed towards land of lesser environmental value.
Paragraphs 18 -21 are particularly key in consideration of the proposal. The government is committed to securing economic growth and ensuring that the planning system does everything it can to support sustainable growth. To help achieve economic growth, local planning authorities should plan proactively to meet the needs of business and support an economy fit for the 21st century. Investment in business should not be over-burdened by the combined requirements of planning policy expectations. Planning policies should recognise and seek to address potential barriers to investment, including a poor environment or any lack of infrastructure.
The NPPF seeks authorities to set out a clear economic vision and strategy which positively and proactively encourages sustainable economic growth and to identify sites, for local and inward investment to match the strategy.
The positive support for economic development, which is repeated within paragraph 28 regarding supporting a prosperous rural economy, should also however be read in conjunction with another key principle and that is to conserve heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their significance.
It is considered that there has been a change in material planning circumstances since consideration of the earlier application for a business park on part of a larger site to allow the current proposal to be considered on its own merits.
The comments of the Parish Council have been noted regarding consideration of both site FX3 and FX4 together. However, site FX3 only provide one of two options for a new settlement within the district and no formal application has been made for this proposal.
It is also noted that whilst the Council is preparing an Economic Growth Strategy, which will seek to build on economic strengths, grow priority sectors and generate higher-value jobs, this work is considered to be complimentary to the Local Plan and it would not be appropriate to hold the planning application in abeyance pending the conclusion of work on the Strategy. Indeed in its role of local planning authority, the Council is required to determine the application taking into account all material planning considerations which will inevitably include the most up to date evidence in respect of employment land requirements.
(2) SOCIO ECONOMIC The applicants identify that the proposed development has been submitted with regard to the Council’s Strong Local Action Plan (2015 -2020), which highlights the need to encourage appropriate inward investment, to increase the diversity of sectors and number of high-skilled jobs. It is also recognised that many of the district’s employment sites are fully developed with limited remaining capacity and that the Harrogate Employment Land review recommends that Harrogate District should identify a new strategic business park and hence the subsequent allocation in the emerging local plan.
The supporting information, which has been the subject of consultation with the Economic Development unit identifies that the site will support an average of 300 full time equivalent (FTE) construction jobs over the lifespan of the construction period of the site. The development itself having the potential to create some 2,840 FTE jobs on site when fully occupied. Further FTE jobs are likely to be created off site via the multiplier effects of new wage expenditure (applicants state 795 FTE jobs). Both figures are considered to be of major significance at the district and regional level. It is recognised the site is not related to a settlement, but has transport links to both the trunk road and wider motorway network. It is estimated that the vast majority of jobs created will be within 30km catchment and will help contribute to mitigating the forecast undersupply of B1a and B1b floor space in the district.
From an Economic Development point of view, a Strong Local Economy is the Council’s number one priority. Priority 1a of the Strong Local Economy Strategic Action Plan 2015- 2020 seeks to identify (and safeguard) sites for employment use, to meet current and future business growth needs across the district. The Economic Development Unit (EDU) identify that the proposed site at Flaxby Green Park is considered to be key in helping to achieve this priority.
The Economic Development Unit identify that from a strong local economy perspective there are two key arguments that highlight the need for the business park.
Argument 1. The district has a lack of high quality, accessible employment land, which is limiting the potential for business growth and forcing businesses to relocate outside Harrogate district
The Economic Viability Report, submitted alongside this application, provides an accurate overview on the Harrogate economy and recognises the pressing economic need to improve the portfolio of employment land locally. The availability of high quality, accessible employment sites is extremely limited within the district, especially within the B planning use classes.
Existing business parks are largely full and opportunities for the development of other employment sites are relatively few. The recent closure of Pannal Business Park and delays to the business occupation of the former Harrogate College blocks B & C at Hornbeam Park are only making the situation worse.
The EDU is concerned regarding that the current lack of employment land is intensified further still by the fact that recent Valuation Office Agency data shows that, over three years, the district has lost 21% of its office floor space. Since May 2013, the council has been notified of many changes of use from office to residential under permitted development rights with almost 40,000sqm of office space proposed for conversion. An additional 3,750sqm of office space has been lost through planning approvals (the figure excludes the on-going Dunlopillo site approved under 14/02804/OUTMAJ - Outline application for demolition of existing buildings to be replaced with a mixed use development to include dwellings, serviced employment plots (use class B1), retail units (use class A1) and care home (use class C2), park and ride, sports pitches and amenity space.
Through its on-going engagement with local companies, the Economic Development Unit is aware that one of the biggest issues facing many businesses in the district is the lack of suitable employment land for expansion and relocation purposes. Indeed, the EDU are aware that a number of medium/large local businesses have sizeable expansion needs that cannot currently be met within the district. This is likely to contribute towards holding back the future growth of these businesses and/or leading them to look outside of the district for premises.
In recent years there have been a number of incidences where successful local businesses have been unable to expand in their current location and, having been unable to find alternative large employment sites nearby, have regrettably been forced to relocate outside the Harrogate district. Obviously it is crucial that we do all we can to retain existing key local employers within the district.
The proposal at Flaxby Green Park is for a large strategic site which would make a significant contribution to meeting the current and long-term demand for employment land in the district, catering for indigenous business growth as well as creating opportunities for appropriate inward investment.
Argument 2. The shortage of high quality, accessible employment sites and premises is restricting opportunities for inward investment, limiting the district’s ability to attract businesses within high value sectors and secure sustainable economic growth.
There is evidence of inward investment demand for large employment land and premises within the Leeds City Region, which the Harrogate district has been unable to benefit from due to the current lack of suitable and available employment sites. The Economic Viability Report recognises that if Harrogate seeks to compete with other locations, it must increase its attractiveness as a location for investment for businesses within high value sectors (including professional, financial, scientific and technical services, and information and communication services). This is supported by the findings of the council’s Employment Land Review (ELR), completed in June 2015, which recommended that HBC should offer a high quality site (or sites) to capture inward investment in key business sectors, to assist in diversifying the district’s economy and maintaining balanced economic prosperity in the period to 2035. The ELR specifically recommends the inclusion of Flaxby Green Park as an allocation for a strategic business park in the new Local Plan. Moreover, the council’s Strong Local Economy Action Plan 2015-2020 sets out an ambition to encourage appropriate inward investment into the district as a way of increasing the diversity of sectors and number of high level skilled jobs available to district residents.
It is anticipated that the Flaxby Green Park would be configured largely around the needs of high value B1 use class occupiers, with a focus on research and development and Hi-Tech Business Units. The applicant anticipates that 50% of onsite workers will be in the top three occupational groupings (managers, directors, professional and associate professionals) with average full time salaries in excess of £30,000 per annum.
This mix is welcomed as it would provide local employment opportunities for higher skilled workers and so help stem the substantial daily outflow of highly qualified workers to Leeds and York. It would also help to redress the impact on the local economy of lower paid sectors highlighted by the district’s notably low workplace wages. These are both key issues for the Harrogate economy that are driving current work within the council’s Economic Development service to develop an Economic Growth Strategy for the district.
It is estimated that the site will offer 14.8 hectares of new employment land of which 53,882sqm is allocated towards office, research and development and light industrial use, with 2,787sqm comprising ancillary uses including a gym, crèche (D2), small retail unit (A1) and café (A3). As such it is suggested that the employment floorspace can support approximately 2,740 direct FTE jobs with the ancillary floorspace supporting an additional 100 FTE jobs. Many more jobs are also likely in local supply chains and supporting sectors. These estimations all appear to be realistic and are based on fair assumptions.
The proposal site is ideally located to benefit the Harrogate district as well as the wider region. It is in a highly accessible location directly adjacent to the A59 and the A1(M), with immediate access to the national motorway network via Junction 47. The provision of a new park and ride facility and rail halt is also welcomed as it will maximise choices for sustainable modes of travel for both employees and business visitors to the district.
The proposal represents sustainable economic development and whilst the EDU are aware that there are many other planning issues that need to be carefully considered in relation to this proposal, consider that Flaxby Green Park would bring significant economic benefits not only to the Harrogate district, but to the wider sub-region. The proposal would significantly assist in ensuring that the future supply of employment land is sufficient to meet the business growth requirements of existing businesses, help retain key local employers who are currently struggling to find suitable expansion land, support inward investment and increase the number of high level skilled jobs available to the district’s residents. Each of these outcomes is identified as a target within HBC’s Strategic Action Plan for a Strong Local Economy (2015-2020).
(3) TRANSPORT AND ACCESSIBILITY The applicants as part of the ES process have submitted a Transport Assessment (TA) which has been undertaken to assess the impact of the proposed development upon the highway network. The TA is supported by both a Travel Plan (TP) and the Chapters within the ES relating to Transport and Accessibility.
The Harrogate District Local Development Framework Core Strategy Policy SG4 requires 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 the transport policies of the Core Strategy.
The travel policies in the Core Strategy identify three core objectives:
- To retain and improve access for all particularly those disadvantaged groups, to key services of health, education, employment, food shopping, community facilities and recreation.
- To integrate development and transport provision and locate development where it is accessible to key services and facilities and a range of transport modes.
- To improve the provision of bus and rail services and facilities, pedestrian and cycle networks, community transport schemes, park and ride and traffic management measures to reduce traffic congestion with priority given to Harrogate and Knaresborough.
The NPPF maintains the emphasis on providing a transport system balanced in favour of sustainable transport modes. In particular Paragraph 32 of the NPPF stating that:
“All developments that generate significant amounts of movements should be supported by a Transport Statement or Transport Assessment. Plans and decisions should take account of whether:
* The opportunities for sustainable transport modes have been taken up depending on the nature and location of the site to reduce the need for major transport infrastructure; * Safe and suitable access to the site can be achieved for all people, and * Improvements can be undertaken within the transport network that cost-effectively limit the significant impacts of development. Development should only be prevented or refused on transport grounds where the residual cumulative impacts of the development are severe.
The site is to be accessed via the A59 utilising the existing infrastructure of the roundabout constructed to serve the previously consented hotel at Flaxby Park. The site itself is located in close proximity to the A1(M) and Junction 47.
The Environment Statement includes a chapter upon transport and accessibility and the application has been the subject of consultation with both the Local Highway Authority and Highways England given the close proximity and potential impact upon the highway network, with specific reference to Junction 47.
The assessment has examined the impact of the development upon the wider highway network along the A59 including the existing roundabout, proposed roundabout and T junction with York Road. The impact upon Junction 47, A1(M) A168 junction, The impact upon the roundabouts at A59 and A658 Harrogate Road the A661 Wetherby Road /A658 Harrogate Road roundabout, A61 Leeds Road/A658 Harrogate Roundabout and A59/A1237 Boroughbridge Road roundabout.
The effect of the proposed development on pedestrian, cycle and public transport links have on the surrounding networks has also been considered in the assessments.
The applicants have identified and promote a number of beneficial measures as part of the proposed development, namely:
* Dedication of land to provide a rail halt * Dedication of land to provide a park and Rail facility * Provision of bus stops with pedestrian connections along the A59 * Provision of a green corridor located within the heart of the development site to provide a segregated traffic free route * Provision of pedestrian routes/links within the internal layout to aid accessibility for employees and visitors * Pedestrian connection between the development site and the rail halt * Provision of a demand responsive shuttle bus between the development site and Knaresborough Bus station * Travel plan promotions and initiatives * Infrastructure improvements works to enhance the operation of Junction 47 of the A1(M) and the A59 /A168 junction.
Right turning from York Road onto the A59 will be restricted.
The application is supported with both a transport assessment and travel plan.
The supporting ES identifies that assessment have been made upon Local highway accidents and safety, concluding that the impact will temporary minor adverse to negligible.
In terms of the impact upon the Local highway network, all junctions will continue to operate within capacity in the design scenario with development traffic, however, because several junction approaches will experience increased queuing it will be necessary to introduce mitigation measures to ensure that that they operate in manner no worse than the base scenario.
The mitigation measures will require significant improvements to Junction 47 of the A1(M), The A59/A168 junction and the link between this and the A59 /Golf course/Donnelly’s Access roundabout. In addition, it will be necessary to ban the right turn manoeuvre of vehicles joining the A59 from York Road. The Travel Plan proposed for the site will also help mitigate the impact of the development on the surrounding network by helping reduce the number of single occupancy car trips.
The improvements include the provision of an additional lane to the A59/A168 junction. Additional west bound lane on approach to A59 / A1(M) roundabout: A1(M) improvements the widening of the south bound slip roads with an additional lane on the roundabout and 2 lane exit merge on the south bound slip road, 2 lane exit northbound, widening of the east bound approach road with the provision of a left turn lane to the north bound slip road. Bus stop provision and creation of footway from the bus stop to the site access. A59 eastbound approach lane extension to the Donnelly roundabout, provision of eastbound bus stop and pedestrian footway.
In terms of the overall study on the network, it is concluded that that there will be a minor adverse residual effect on the highway network following the implementation of the proposed mitigation.
In terms of pedestrian and cycle access, the improvements are limited to within the site itself to aid movement and conflict with vehicular traffic through segregation. These include access to the bridleway, connections to the A59, connection with the park and rail facility, provision of access to bus stops.
In terms of public transport access, the developers propose bus stops along the A59, including a real-time timetable and a demand responsive shuttle-bus service for employees linking to Knaresborough bus station. The service will coordinate with staff shift changes and with bus /rail departures. The proposal will also include dedication of land to provide rail halt and dedication of land to provide a park and rail facility.
The scheme has been the subject of negotiation with both the Local Highway Authority and Highways England, which has resulted in amendments to the Travel Plan, to further aid reduction by single car occupancy. Subject to ensuring details of the identified road improvements and travel plan within a S106 Legal agreement, there is no objection to the development on highway safety grounds subject to the imposition of conditions.
The Local Highway Authority note that the site is located to the south of the A59 adjacent to junction 47 on the A1(M). This is identified as one of the key junctions within North Yorkshire where east, west journeys between Harrogate and York and the wider local highway network (LHN) managed by NYCC meets the A1(M) and the Department of Transports Strategic Road network (SRN). Prior to the submission of the application NYCC and Highways England, who manage the SRN for DfT had secured Local Enterprise Partner (LEP) funding for improvements to J47 to address existing congestion issues, particularly queuing on the slip roads. This scheme, which is to be delivered by April 2018, is referred to as the ‘LEP scheme’ and includes signalisation of J47 and the uncontrolled A59/A168 junction with MOVA controllers. The supporting TA prepared by Optima has been subject of rigorous checking and examination of the traffic impact upon both the SRN and LHN with the LHA and Highway England working in partnership, to ensure that the impact on both highway networks was considered holistically.
The key concern has been the testing of the traffic model and impact on J47 of the A1(M) and LHN. A number of iterations of the Optima model have been created to replicate expected traffic usage, geometrical features and saturation flows and realistically represent the future operation of J47 and the local roads. Additional modelling and checking has been undertaken by Highways England consultants and those working for the LHA to confirm the appropriateness of the modelling and solutions proposed by the applicant. The results of these analyses concur that the applicants proposed improvements will mitigate the Flaxby Green Park together with the committed developments.
The Travel Plan (TP) has evolved over consideration of the application and Revision 3 indicates how the development will use sustainable travel methods to ensure that the trip generation rates from the TA rate not exceeded. These will be monitored every 6 months through travel questionnaires and traffic surveys and reported to annually to the Steering Group, which is set up to monitor the TP. Should the target trip rates be exceeded the Steering Group will agree on measures to be taken to reduce trip rates. A sum of £300,000 has been offered to enable the Steering Group to deliver this.
The site is also located adjacent to the Harrogate York Railway line. A site for a rail halt and Park and Rail facility has been identified within the application site, but does not form part of the proposed development. Whilst the potential to create a rail halt at this location is welcomed by the LHA, the timetabling constraints which already exists on the Harrogate Line will mean careful consideration and detailed discussion with rail operators will need to establish if the rail halt is viable without compromising the existing timetabling and facilities on the line. Consequently, whilst the allocation of land for the rail halt is welcomed it cannot be considered as part of the sustainable travel proposals for the site.
The TP acknowledges that there are limited opportunities for walking and cycling as a means of travel to the site, however, links within the site will be created to provide options for short journeys between facilities on the site and to the rail halt if this is progressed. This is considered appropriate for this location.
Whilst there are bus services which pass the site the timetabling does not facilitate commuting by bus. The applicants has thus proposed a dedicated shuttle bus which will be demand responsive and funded by the applicant from the point of occupation of 15,00 sqm of floor space until one year following 80% occupation of the site. It is anticipated that the shuttle bus will as a minimum include:-
* A midi bus of approx. 40 seats * A route including Knaresborough bus station * A service that coordinates with staff changes * A service that coordinates with bus and rail timetables; and * A service that will be flexible, where possible to meet changing travel demands
The shuttle bus could also divert to serve adjacent villages (such as Flaxby and Goldsborough) to respond to demand. This is considered by the LHA to be the most appropriate way of offering bus travel as a viable choice for travel to the site.
It is acknowledged that travel by car will be the main means of travel to the site and the TP proposes measures to promote car sharing. This is considered to be a key means of restraining trip generation.
Whilst the application is submitted in outline form, the applicant has indicated that they are proposing to keep the internal roads within the site as private roads outside the LHA’s maintained highway network. The LHA has no objection in principle subject to the mechanism for the future maintenance of the estate roads having a satisfactory legal entity. The applicant has also indicated the roads will be built and laid out to the standards set by the LHA to ensure that they are appropriate for the proposed traffic.
Given the detailed consideration of the application and in particular the mitigation proposed to address the impact on the operation of Junction 47 the LHA has no objection to the proposed development subject to securing a matters relating to the Travel Plan through a Section 106 Agreement to which the LHA is a party and by the imposition of conditions. On this basis the proposals are considered to accord with relevant national and local transport policies.
(4) LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL IMPACT Core Strategy objectives contained under the Environment and Quality of Life section seek as a key objective to protect and enhance the built and natural environment, including biodiversity, landscape character, giving special protection towards these areas and buildings of recognised importance. This is maintained through Policy EQ2 which seeks to protect the high quality of the natural and built environment, giving a level of protection appropriate to its international, national and or local importance. Subject to the Districts need to plan for new greenfield development, the landscape character of the whole district will be protected and where appropriate enhanced.
The site itself is not covered by any landscape designation that would suggest an increased value and there are no statutory or non–statutory designations that would prohibit its development. The proposal represents the development of a greenfield site, the need for the new business park having been identified in the emerging local plan.
The saved Harrogate District Local Plan Policy C2 seeks to ensure that development should protect existing landscape character. Clearly in applying this policy, where there is an identified need for development, there will be conflict through the loss of greenfield sites.
Core Strategy Policy SG4 states that all development proposals in the District should comply with the following criteria. The scale, density, layout and design should make the most efficient use of land; and a) be well integrated with, and complementary to, neighbouring buildings and the spatial qualities of the local area; b) be appropriate to the form and character of the settlement and/or landscape character. Visual, residential and general amenity should be protected and where possible enhanced.
The saved Harrogate District Local Plan Policy HD13 seeks to ensure that development proposals which would involve the loss of trees or woodland which contribute to the character or setting of a settlement will not be permitted. Clearly in consideration of the proposed development, the site is located in a countryside location and as such the scheme will not impact upon any settlement. In the wider context, regard does however have to be taken in respect of the impact of the development upon the adjacent woodland as a consequence of its rural location.
The site is situated to the south of the A59 highway and to the west of the A1(Motorway) set within the south-west quadrant of junction 47. Flaxby village lies 0.6km to the north-west. Land use comprises of two arable fields to the east and Flaxby Covert together with an area of amenity grassland, surfaced highway and an area of hardstanding used for parking. The overall site area amounts to 40.5ha. Landform gently slopes from north-east to south-west.
The site is located in Landscape Character Area LCA 68: Hunsingore and Hopperton wooded farmland. Described as ‘a moderate to large-scale landscape consisting of large fields and several large woodland blocks creating a partially enclosed feel…………This is a pleasant and attractive area but the presence of the A1(M) and its constant traffic noise is detrimental and the corridor is likely to be subject to future development pressure’.
The scheme has been the subject of pre-application discussions, which has very much led to the adoption of a landscape-led approach to development, given the rural location and relationship with the nearby Allerton Park registered Park and Garden and Listed building.
In assessing this site as part of the emerging local Plan process, the landscape officer had concluded that the landscape has some capacity to accept development, provided that the existing woodland is retained and extended into open arable areas with new development contained within a wooded structure taking into account Green Infrastructure and connected links.
The site comprises three distinct land uses. To the east is an arable field divided by an open field drain crossing east to west between the A1(M) and Flaxby Covert. To the west is the mixed deciduous woodland associated with Flaxby Covert and to the south west is an area of land set within the grounds of the former RR Donnelley site, comprising amenity grassland, surfaced highways and existing hardstanding.
The site has been assessed as being of medium-value landscape set within a framework of low value features that include the immediate highway and railway setting and its existing industrial context. The wider setting does however include to the north east Allerton park, A grade II registered Park and Garden that contains a number of Grade I and II and II* star Listed Buildings, the most notable being Allerton Castle and The Temple of Victory. The parkland itself has been assessed as a high-value landscape.
The scheme will include the retention of the existing woodland and enhancement of the existing pond within the Flaxby Covert and the watercourse that runs across the site. The watercourse retained as a landscape feature, providing part of a central greenspace within the site, together with the function of as a sustainable drainage resource. The applicants propose green space and planting that will link the main commercial element of the site, which is to be constructed upon the arable fields back towards the woodland. The landscape strategy secures new areas of peripheral structural landscaping to provide a landscape framework, alongside a structured network of green corridors running throughout the main body of the site that will in the opinion of the applicants, provide over a period of time an extended tree canopy across the site to filter views from surrounding elevated locations, including the view from the Temple of Victory. The Landscape Officer notes that in landscape and visual impact terms there will be large scale adverse effects which will be most pronounced in the early stages of development, the loss of farmland will be permanent and materially change the immediate character of the eastern area of the site and the character of the adjoining highways. Beyond the site boundary these impacts however are likely to reduce over time as landscape mitigation of proposed woodland structural and screen planting works become more effective in filtering views and assimilating the development into the landscape. The large percentage of the overall site retained as woodland cover and proposed structural/screen planting will greatly assist in this process. Should the council be minded to approve the application a dimensioned landscape parameters plan should be submitted detailing minimum distances of all planting zones.
It is acknowledged and accepted that there will be short term adverse affects to landscape character with particular reference to immediate boundaries of the site from the A59 and J47 and users of the bridleway, these are considered significant. In terms of long term effects the EIA supporting information has concluded that through the implementation of landscape strategy, which secures a greenspace strategy, including the provision of green corridors, structured hierarchy of tree planting measures including measures both within and at the boundaries of the site together with plot planting with internal boundaries defined by hedgerow will limit any adverse landscape and visual effects in the long term. This has been agreed by the Landscape Officer.
A Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment forms part of the submission together with a Green Infrastructure plan shown on Parameters Plan No3 of the supporting submission. The submitted Landscape Masterplan ref:E.11 shows only on-plot tree planting alongside the A59 whereas earlier iterations (GL0470 11) show a wide swathe of proposed structural/screen planting which has clearly been taken into consideration in terms of filtering views from the ‘The Temple’ scheduled monument at Allerton Park. This woodland screening is clearly shown in the verified views assessment document (viewpoint 2 Fig 7.3.3). The Landscape Officer re-iterates that woodland screening will be required along the A59.
The Landscape Strategy that has been forwarded and agreed by the Landscape Officer seeks the retention and safeguarding of Flaxby Covert and its woodland resource. This will include enhancement through the removal of the existing paintball business, mitigation through planting and re-enforcement to compensate for loss of tree cover as part of the access proposals. Improved management of access to the woodland and the adoption of a landscape and ecological management plan.
The arboricultural officer confirms that there is no Arboricultural objection to the proposed loss of the trees in order to facilitate the installation of the highway and cycle path. The number of trees lost should be replaced at a minimum rate of 2:1, which should be incorporated in to a wider woodland management plan for the site.
The trees proposed for removal in general, i.e. those trees within the woodland itself, attach their own habitat values. In essence, unless it can be demonstrated that those trees pose an unacceptable level of risk to persons using the woodland or any adjacent structures, then they should be retained. Their future status within the woodland should be re-assessed within the confines of a wider woodland management plan for the site. The arboricultural officer confirms that once the final landscaping master plan has been agreed then this should be made the subject of a Tree Preservation Order to ensure that trees planted as part of the development are given adequate protection going forwards.
Overall, it is considered that the level of landscape retention on site coupled with the level of landscape planting proposed on site will be to a level which will mitigate the landscape impact of the proposal. Harm caused by the development will be more notable during the construction phase and early days of the development, but as the proposed landscaping matures this will reduce this harm to an acceptable level and ensure the proposal is not in conflict with national and local landscape policy.
(5) ECOLOGY The protection of the ecological interests of sites is embodied within the saved Harrogate District Local Plan Nature Conservation Chapter and the NPPF as a whole. The nature Conservation policies contained within the saved Local Plan seek as an objective to protect sites, habitats and species of nature conservation interest from inappropriate development and secondly to enhance the nature conservation interest in the district. These aims are considered consistent with the NPPF.
The site the subject of the application, as previously identified consist of contrasting habitat as a consequence of the woodland cover to the west and arable fields to the east. The site as a whole is not protected by any ecological designation. There are however two SSSI sites located at Hay a Park and Birkham Wood within 4.2km of the site.
Policy NC4 is considered applicable. This policy identifies that outside designated sites, development will not be permitted which would result in the loss of or damage to semi natural habitats which are important for nature conservation. Protection of these habitats will be afforded in accordance with their importance within the District.
The policy does not therefore prevent development but will require mitigation and enhancement overall as required by the overarching chapter objectives.
The application has been supported through the ES with a chapter on Ecological Impacts together with ecological surveys on habitat, bat survey (including emergence and activity surveys), Bird survey (including activity and nesting), Amphibian surveys and a Flora survey.
The ES concludes that there will be no impact upon the two SSSI sites.
The ponds to the west of the site tested positively for Great Crested Newts (GCN). Although no development is proposed to take place around these ponds works to improve the access will take place within 50m. A mitigation plan will be required to protect the population during the construction and operational phase of the development.
Activity surveys indicated the woodland is used by both bats and birds and again it will be required that a mitigation and enhancement plan will be required.
There is evidence that the site has supported badger activity.
As the paintballing activity on the site of the woodland will cease, the woodland habitat will be allowed to recover. A woodland management plan is also proposed to further enhance the development and ensure future viability. The invasive species on site including Himalayan Balsam will be removed following an eradication plan and the site will be resurveyed annually for the regrowth of these plants.
The Rural Strategy Officer has been consulted. In consideration of the proposal and in assessment of the emerging allocation the Rural Strategy Officer has maintained that development of the arable fields would be likely to be acceptable but development of the woodland and wet woodland which forms approximately 50% of the site would be ecologically damaging. The applicants have adopted this methodology in the proposed development of the business park.
The Rural Strategy Officer initially identified that additional survey work would be required to supplement the information provided within the ES with specific reference to GCN, bats and Breeding birds. Additional interim survey work has been undertaken and has been assessed by the Rural Strategy Officer.
In relation to the GCN population on site the rural strategy officer has confirmed that they are readily capable of being mitigated for, through standard exclusion techniques from working areas and through habitat enhancement as indicated in the landscape masterplan.
The Bat surveys provide detailed information on bat activity on the site which can now be utilised to prepare a mitigation scheme resulting to both habitat disruption as a consequence of access provision and lighting.
Concern is expressed regarding the impact on breeding birds as the information submitted does not provide a robust assessment of background conditions for breeding birds to inform an Environmental Statement. The rural strategy officer does however comment that further work on breeding birds could be undertaken this spring or as a consequence of time constraints next year. However, as the likelihood is that the presence of birds of agricultural farmland would be capable of being mitigated for on-site (e.g. through the retention of hedgerows with field margins), this is a matter which would be capable of being dealt with by condition together with the completion of surveys for bats and GCN and would not therefore constitute a reason for an objection on ecological grounds.
Overall, there are no objections to the scheme on ecological grounds subject to the imposition of conditions to ensure compliance with Policy NC4 and the NPPF.
(6) HERITAGE As part of the ES process a detailed assessment of the impact of the proposals on heritage assets has been undertaken through a Heritage Impact Assessment.
The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (section 66(1)) requires special regard to be had to the desirability of preserving a listed building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses.
The Harrogate District Local Development Framework Core Strategy was adopted in 2009. Policy EQ2 seeks to incorporate high quality locally distinctive design as part all development and to protect the historic built environment. The Harrogate District Heritage Management Guidance - Supplementary Planning Document provides guidance in relation to development which affects heritage assets. It states that Listed Buildings will be conserved and, where appropriate, enhanced. Loss of any significance should be minimised, and will be permitted only where any harm is justified by the public benefits of the proposal. These policies reflect the statutory duties defined in the Act.
The Harrogate District Local Plan was adopted in 2001. Amongst other things Policy HD20 seeks to ensure that new development respects the local distinctiveness of existing buildings.
The saved Harrogate District Local Plan identifies as a key aim that development should protect preserve, restore and where appropriate enhance those main features of the built environment, which contribute to the heritage and character of the district and to safeguard sites of archaeological and historic significance whilst promoting high standards of design and quality in new development.
Policy HD7A identifies that development will not be permitted where it would adversely affect the character or setting of parks and gardens included in the English Heritage (now Historic England) Register of Parks and Gardens of special historic interest. The policy is designed to protect their historic interest, which remains unaffected by the development. The Landscape Character policy, C2 covers their visual or landscape interest.
Paragraph 132 of Section 12 of the NPPF requires that “when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. The more important the asset, the greater the weight should be. Significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting. As heritage assets are irreplaceable, any harm or loss should require clear and convincing justification”.
Paragraph 134 of Section 12 of the NPPF states that “where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal, including securing its optimum viable use”.
Section 12 of the NPPF seeks to conserve and enhance the historic environment and recognises that heritage assets are an irreplaceable resource requiring conservation appropriate to their significance. Paragraph 129 of the National Planning Policy Framework requires authorities to identify and assess the particular significance of any heritage asset that may be affected by a proposal taking account of available evidence and any necessary expertise.
The Council has identified the site as a draft employment land allocation. Notwithstanding this, there are a number of constraints: the inter visibility between the site and Allerton Park needs to be carefully considered in order to ensure that the proposed development will not be detrimental to the setting of these heritage assets and the Registered Historic Park and Garden contrary to current legislation, policy and guidance.
The significance and importance of the setting and status of the grade I listed Allerton Park and the grade II* Temple of Victory, together with the character and setting of the Registered Historic Park and Garden must not be underestimated or detrimentally affected by new development. Views of Allerton Park and the Temple of Victory should be retained and protected. It should be noted that Allerton Park mansion was designed and orientated to survey the rural landscape to the south and west. Development of this site must not be to the detriment of the character and appearance of the landscape. Ox Close Wood constitutes a significant woodland clump that is important in the landscape and should be retained and enhanced.
The Council’s conservation and design officer notes that “The proposed development will result in a change to the landscape character, introducing uncharacteristic built form into the rural landscape. But subject to the following, it is considered that the development will cause less than substantial harm to the setting and significance of the heritage assets and there are opportunities for mitigation and improvements. The harm can be mitigated, in part, by reducing the scale of the development, reducing the scale and massing of individual buildings within the zones (i.e. lowering building height parameters at points of sensitivity and visibility, breaking up the building mass of individual buildings and building groups). Furthermore, the matters covered by the Design Code- such as building and roof forms, material palette and finishes, lighting- as well as a robust and integral landscaping strategy, can greatly assist in seeking to mitigate the harm”.
Historic England have identified that the proposed development will affect the setting of several designated heritage assets. Of primary concern to Historic England is the impact of the development on the Temple of Victory, Grade II* listed building and Allerton park, Grade II registered park and Garden. Historic England consider that the urbanisation of the proposed site through the creation of a Business Park would cause harm to the rural setting these heritage assets which contribute positively to their significance. Furthermore, Historic England do not consider the justification for the Business park outweighs the harm to the heritage assets caused by it.
Allerton Park is particularly significant for its parkland enlarged in the 1720’s and reworked in the 1770’s. The Temple of Victory was built as a summerhouse or view point in the late C18 and is situated on a knoll in the park to the north east of the application site. The Temple was designed to be a prominent feature and exert a wide visual influence across a rural landscape. The Temple derives considerable significance for its prominence and visibility from considerable distance.
Historic England identify that the agricultural setting of Allerton Park makes a positive contribution to its significance, which is best understood and appreciated in the dynamic sense of moving through the landscape and appreciating its parkland character in a rural setting. It is argued that the development site currently makes a positive contribution to the setting of the heritage assets by virtue of its largely unchanged and unspoilt agricultural character which allows the heritage assets, particularly the Temple to be viewed and appreciated in a wide landscape context.
The development will undoubtedly result in urbanisation of the site as recognised by Historic England and this it is accepted will cause harm to the setting of those assets.
The landscape strategy proposed for the development does propose a network of internal footpaths utilising the green corridors and will include a central social space with high levels of heritage interpretation. The applicants identify that this will increase public awareness and understanding of the Allerton Park and its associated assets. The scheme will also incorporate viewing corridors through the site towards the heritage assets of Allerton Park. The viewing corridor is to be aligned between The Temple of Victory, through the site and Bayram hill. The corridor will not only be evident for users within the site but also for users of the PROW to the south of the site. The design parameters plan has been careful to ensure that building heights are maintained to preserve long distance views and over a period provide landscape mitigation from views from the Heritage Assets.
Historic England do accept that the scheme in part, has provided mitigation through design solutions, such as paying careful attention to the layout, building heights, roof forms and controlling lighting strategies. Historic England nevertheless considers that the development does not meet paragraphs 131-134 of the NPPF and the setting is best maintained as agricultural land.
Historic England have not however identified the level of harm or significance of harm though the council’s conservation and design officer identifies it as being less than substantial. The more important the asset, the greater weight should be. Significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or such as the potential impact here, development within its setting. Substantial harm to Grade II Listed buildings or park and garden should be exceptional, whilst harm to assets of greatest significance including Grade I and II* buildings should be wholly exceptional.
The advice within the NPPF is clear that where development will lead to substantial harm or total loss of significance of a designated heritage asset, local planning authorities should refuse consent unless it can be demonstrated that the substantial harm is necessary to achieve public benefits that outweigh that harm.
Paragraph 134 identifies where a development will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of the heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal.
Given the conclusion of the Council’s Conservation and Design Officer that harm is less than substantial it is considered that the advice in Paragraph 134 is pertinent to this case and the balance the council is required to undertake of harm versus benefits is addressed later in this report.
Archaeology
The applicant has undertaken an archaeological assessment of the site, which has included geophysical surveying and trail trenching. This has been undertaken following North Yorkshire County Councils Heritage Units assessment of the Cultural Heritage chapter in the ES. Following receipt of the results of the trial trenching reports, the heritage unit have confirmed that this information together with the archaeological desk based assessment and geophysical survey provide an appropriate assessment of the archaeological potential of the site and meet the information requirements of the NPPF in relation to heritage assets (Paragraph 128). The trail trenching report has identified that the majority of features identified within the geophysical survey can be explained as either natural or agricultural drainage. No dateable archaeological features were identified. It is therefore agreed that the archaeological potential of the site is low and as such the Heritage Unit have confirmed that they have no objections to the proposed development.
(7) VISUAL AMENITY Core Strategy Policy SG4 states that all development proposals in the District should comply with the following criteria. The scale, density, layout and design should make the most efficient use of land; and a) be well integrated with, and complementary to, neighbouring buildings and the spatial qualities of the local area; b) be appropriate to the form and character of the settlement and/or landscape character. Visual, residential and general amenity should be protected and where possible enhanced.
Policy EQ2 states that the District's exceptionally high quality natural and built environment will be given a level of protection appropriate to its international, national and local importance. Subject to the District's need to plan for new greenfield development, the landscape character of the whole District will be protected and where appropriate enhanced. One of the priority measures to protect and enhance the District's natural and built environment is to ensure that new development incorporates high quality locally distinctive design.
Good design is seen as a key objective of the NPPF and is seen as a key aspect of sustainable development. The NPPF identifies that local planning authorities should consider using design codes where can help deliver high quality outcomes. Given the sensitivity of this site with particular reference to landscape impact and heritage assets, this approach is considered acceptable here.
The scheme is submitted in outline form but with supporting information contained with parameter plans and a Design Code which identifies differing scale of buildings and view points through the site. The conservation and design team note that the principles of the Design Code are supported with regards to the plots (with the exception of comments relating to building height parameters detailed below), zoning, design aspirations, material palette, access and circulation routes and landscaping, but excludes all outstanding matters, such as floorspace. It is imperative that the Design Code fosters high quality design, an appropriate layout, sufficient landscaping, including tree planting to assimilate the development into the landscape and woodland clumps.
The revision to the building height parameters is noted, but considered to be insufficient to address concerns raised previously- the ‘blown up’ views illustrate that the development will still be visible in the site at 15 years. A revised parameters plan should be secured, which re- examines the southern boundary with regards to the visibility and height of plots views 14, 11, 10 and 9. The impact of the height and visibility of these plots could be addressed by increasing the building buffer and/or the landscape buffer, coupled with appropriate building design and material palette.
Reference to ‘general width of new perimeter landscape buffer’ should be omitted- rather it should state ‘minimum width of new perimeter landscape buffer’. The landscape buffer to the A59 and A1(M) should be a minimum of 15m.
If the A1(M) slip road is to be widened, this should not compromise or indeed, intrude into the perimeter landscape buffer.
The intention for Plot 9 to be a ‘prominent landmark building’ to ‘promote the business park to A1(M) users’ is noted. The perimeter planting at this point should be consistent rather than compromised or ‘breached’ by this plot. Proposals for this plot needs to demonstrate that the designated heritage assets will not be adversely affected. Tree planting should be integral to any scheme for development to mitigate impact.
Proposals for signage should be controlled by condition to any consent granted.
The use of the design Code principles can be controlled by condition.
The application is submitted in outline form and matters relating to layout, scale and design are reserved for future approval. It is considered that via the use of conditions to control key matters the visual impact of the development can be retained at an acceptable level to accord with national and local policy.
(8) FLOOD RISK AND DRAINAGE
Part of the site falls within Flood Zone 2 and 3 and the development itself is supported with a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) that has been the subject of consultation with the Local Lead Flood Authority. The FRA has been completed in accordance with the NPPF and summarises the flood risk to the site from various sources including fluvial, groundwater and overland flow.
The commercial development area is located in Flood Zone 1, the majority of the park and rail site is within Flood Zone 1. A drainage ditch (Moor Drain) runs through the park and rail area and the channel of the drain is indicated to be within Flood Zones 2 and 3. This is restricted to a small part of the site towards the western boundary. The proposed development is classified as Less Vulnerable. In accordance with the Planning Practice Guidance Table 3 a less vulnerable development is Flood Zones 1, 2 and 3 is considered appropriate. The proposed development is considered to be at low risk of groundwater flooding from the main groundwater. The site may be impacted by overland flow from a number of sources including Fluvial, uncontrolled run off and sewers.
Existing surface water is discharged via direct infiltration, surface runoff and the land drainage network, there are no public sewers in the vicinity of the site.
The developers are seeking Suds system to dispose of surface water. The concept design drainage for the commercial development zone includes:
* Roofline drainage to be attenuated by green roofs where suitable * Highways and hard landscaping areas drainage to be conveyed and partially attenuated via combination of filter strips and swales and bio retention cells (rain gardens). * Stormwater run-off to be accommodated through infiltration and a network of swales running through the landscape masterplan. Storage estimates that approx. 8,500 cubic metres of storage will be required with a further 2800 cubic metres for the Park area and Commercial plots 15, 16 and 17.
The site discharge rate is to be restricted to 1.4l/s Ha. The wider surface water network is to be designed not to cause an increase in flooding for an event with a return period of 1 in 100yeras. When /if a return of over 1 in 100years is encountered then the surface water will be directed into swales within the development. The Local Lead Flood Authority have no objection to the development subject to the imposition of a conditions, an approach which is also supported by the HBC land Drainage Engineer.
In terms of foul water drainage, Yorkshire Water require a separate system of drainage and note that the supporting drainage strategy is acceptable but will require a funded feasibility study to identify a suitable point of discharge /potential upgrades. Both foul water and surface water discharge can be controlled by condition. Yorkshire Water fully endorse the surface water drainage strategy adopted by the applicant.
(9) GROUND CONDITIONS The Chief Environmental Health Officer has advised that the standard ground contamination condition should be attached should members be minded to approve the application.
Natural England have confirmed in their response that in relation to soils and land quality that the documents accompanying the proposal, that the application falls outside the scope of the Development Management Procedure Order (as amended) consultation arrangements, as the proposed development would not appear to lead to the permanent loss of over 20 ha ‘best and most versatile’ agricultural land (paragraph 112 of the National Planning Policy Framework).
Though the application site is 40.5ha it is recognised that more than half of the land affected by the development will remain undeveloped (for example as retained woodland, habitat creation and landscaping). In order to retain the long term potential of this land and to safeguard soil resources as part of the overall sustainability of the whole development, it is important that the soil is able to retain as many of its many important functions and services (ecosystem services) as possible through careful soil management.
(10) OTHER MATTERS Core Strategy EQ1 seeks to reduce the risks to the environment by reducing energy and water consumption. The policy identifies that in consideration of development other than residential, proposals should seek to achieve a ‘very good’ standard as set out in the Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM). Such provision can be controlled by condition.
The lighting scheme for the development should be designed to minimise light pollution and prevent light spillage. Although the separation distance to the nearest dwellings is large it is still recommended that the applicant be required to submit details of any floodlighting to be provided at the detailed stage. This would be subject to a condition requiring that details are submitted and approved prior to it being brought into use.
The Chief Environmental Health Officer has commented that they have reviewed the noise report prepared by Hydrock dated July 2016. The report has identified the nearest noise sensitive properties off site and stipulates a design target level for plant which will be required on the new development. The author of the report states that specific ventilation and façade designs will be needed for each specific building on site once the detailed stage is reached. This will take into account the findings of the noise map and design levels in BS8233:2014.
A further noise report should be submitted at the detailed stage to cover the points above. To deal with noise from the construction phase a construction management plan is recommended. This can be controlled by condition.
(11) PLANNING BALANCE The Council’s employment land allocation and quantum policies are considered out of date. The scheme by reason of its scale would fail the provision of criteria A of Policy E8, although with mitigation it is considered complaint with criteria B and C. The Council is however looking to increase its employment land provision through the emerging local plan process. The ELR clearly demonstrates the District has an undersupply of employment land up until 2035.
The ELR states that there is a strong economic and policy case for the allocation of the Flaxby site including: providing an attractive opportunity to diversify the local economy through significant inward investment and expansion of existing businesses; ensuring Harrogate’s economic role within the wider area is reinforced and the opportunity to realise the financial and business benefits of the district’s membership of two Local Enterprise Partnerships. The Flaxby site has excellent access to the strategic transport network and will benefit from planned improvements to Junction 47 of the A1(M). It provides an excellent opportunity for a mixed B Use Class Business Park and given its size has the potential to provide a major inward investment site to serve the Harrogate district.
Such an approach is supported by the general overarching thrust of the NPPF towards delivering sustainable development and building a strong, competitive economy. It has been demonstrated that there is a shortfall and pressing need for new employment land and the benefits that such a site will bring provides a compelling case for the development.
It is acknowledged that the site does occupy a rural countryside location, however, it has been accepted by Highways England and the Local Highway Authority that both the Strategic road network and local highway network can accommodate the proposal, with mitigation and upgrading of a key junction within North Yorkshire. The implementation of the Travel Plan through S106 would aid sustainability.
The applicants have provided landscape mitigation to help assimilate the proposed development into the local landscape. It is accepted that the Business Park will provide an urbanising feature in the locality, however, the use of design codes and landscape mitigation will aid assimilation.
The site is located some distance from the Heritage Assets of Allerton Park and is separated by the A1(M), J47 and the A59. Nevertheless, the development of these arable fields will clearly have an adverse impact upon the setting of those structures and Registered Garden and there significance. This is recognised within Historic England response to the application.
The scheme as recognised within the socio economic section will bring significant economic benefit to the district and such benefit would need to be balanced against the harm to the significance of the setting of Listed Buildings and Registered park. Historic England do not identify the significance of harm, but do highlight that the applicants have built mitigation measures into the scheme. This is also recognised by the Councils Conservation and Design team who view the level of harm to be less than substantial and also note the mitigation and the added value to the significance of the assets by maintaining views and a commitment to providing areas of information regarding the significance of the assets from within the site. Given the shortfall of employment land and the benefits that the site will bring to the district, it is considered that this would outweigh the harm to the significance of the setting of the heritage assets and approval of the application can be supported.
CONCLUSION The proposed application will represent the development of a strategic business park to meet the current shortfall of employment land identified within the district. The Council’s employment land allocation and quantum policies are recognised as of been out of date and as such paragraph 14 of the NPPF is engaged in the consideration of the application.
The emerging Local plan carries no weight at present but does identify the site as strategic employment site that will bring significant economic benefits to the district. The tilted balance within the NPPF requires the approval of sustainable development, unless 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 or specific policies in the NPPF indicate development should be restricted. Such restriction would include impacts upon heritage assets.
It has been demonstrated that landscape/visual harm and transport / accessibility can be mitigated against. It is acknowledged that development of the arable fields will have some harmful impact upon the significance of the setting the both the Grade II* Temple Of Victory, Allerton castle (Grade I) and Grade II Registered park and Garden as a consequence of its built development and loss of open rural character. The applicants have provided mitigation measures to assimilate the development into the landscape. It is considered that the harm will be less than substantial and would not outweigh the significant benefit to the District’s economy that the development would bring.
CASE OFFICER: Mr Andy Hough
RECOMMENDATION
That the application be DEFERRED for the following reason(s):-
0 That the application be deferred for the Chief Planner to approve the application subject to the completion of a S106 covering the following Heads of Terms:
Implementation of approved Travel Plan and securing of associated funding
1 No development shall take place without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority of all details of the following reserved matters -
(a) appearance; (b) landscaping; (c) layout; and (d) scale. Thereafter the development shall not be carried out otherwise than in strict accordance with the approved details.
2 Application for the approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the Local Planning Authority not later than three years from the date of this permission. The development hereby permitted shall be begun on or before the expiration of two years from the final approval of reserved matters or in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved.
3 Any application for approval of reserved matters under this outline permission shall be accompanied by a revised Design and Access Statement covering the following information and or issues -
A revised parameters plan should be secured, which re-examines the southern boundary with regards to the visibility and height of plots views 14, 11, 10 and 9. The impact of the height and visibility of these plots could be addressed by increasing the building buffer and/or the landscape buffer, coupled with appropriate building design and material palette.
A dimensioned landscape parameters plan should be submitted. This should state 'minimum width of new perimeter landscape buffer' rather than general width as per the existing submission. The landscape buffer to the A59 and A1(M) should be a minimum of 15m.
If the A1(M) slip road is to be widened, this should not compromise or indeed, intrude into the perimeter landscape buffer.
The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the submitted revised Design and Access Statement with specific reference to the Design Code principles identified within the Design and Access Statement 7040/DAS December 2016.
4 Unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, there shall be no excavation or other ground works, except for investigative works, or the depositing of material on the site in connection with construction of the access road or building(s) or other works hereby permitted until full details of the following have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority:
a. The estate roads b. Vehicular, cycle and pedestrian accesses to individual plots c. vehicular and cycle parking d. Vehicular turning arrangements e. Manoeuvring arrangements for individual plots f. Loading and unloading arrangements for individual plots
5 No part of the development to which this permission relates shall be brought into use until the roads and any footway/footpath from which it gains access shall be constructed to basecourse macadam level and kerbed and connected to the existing highway network with street lighting installed and in operation. The completion of all road works, including any phasing, shall be in accordance with a programme approved in writing with the Local Planning Authority before any part of the development is brought into use.
6 No individual plot shall be brought into use until the approved vehicle access, parking, manoeuvring and turning areas approved under condition number 4 above have constructed in accordance with the drawing approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Once created these areas shall be maintained clear of any obstruction and retained for their intended purpose at all times.
7 Notwithstanding the provisions of any Town and Country Planning General Permitted Development Order or Special Development Order for the time being in force, all areas subsequently approved for parking spaces, turning areas and access shall be kept available for their intended purposes at all times.
8 Unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority no part of the development shall be brought into use until the highway works shown on drawing reference 60483848_AEC_00_LO_DR_CH_00010_A_C04 (the LEP scheme) have been constructed in accordance with the approved specification and opened to all traffic.
9 Prior to the occupation of 10,000sqm floor space the approved highway works shown on drawing 13067/GA/02 revision C (the Flaxby Green Park scheme) shall have been constructed in accordance with the approved specification and opened to all traffic.
10 No development for any phase of the development shall take place until a Construction Method Statement for that phase has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The Approved Statement shall be adhered to throughout the construction period for the phase. The statement shall provide for the following in respect of the phase:
a. The parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors b. Delivery of materials and plant to the site c. Loading and unloading of plant and materials d. Removal of materials from site e. Storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development f. Wheel washing facilities g. Measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during construction h. A scheme for recycling/disposing of waste resulting from demolition and construction works i. HGV routing to the site j. Protection of carriageway and footway users at all times during construction k. Erection of hoardings, security fencing l. Protection of contractors working adjacent to the highway m. A programme for each phase of the works n. Hours of work restricted to: 08:00 to 18:00 hours Monday to Friday 08:00 to 13:00 hours on Saturdays With no working on Sundays and Bank/National Holidays, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. 11 No development shall take place until a Design Stage Certificate issued by BRE has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall meet BREEAM "very good" or higher. Thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
12 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 and the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended) (or any order revoking and re-enacting those Orders with or without modification), the light industrial buildings hereby approved under the Use Class B1 definition shall not be used for any other purpose without the formal consent of the Local Planning.
13 No development shall take place until a detailed design and associated management and maintenance plan of surface water drainage for the site based on sustainable drainage principles and an assessment of the hydrological and hydrogeological context of the development has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The surface water drainage design should demonstrate that the surface water runoff generated during rainfall events up to and including the 1 in 100 years rainfall event, to include for climate change, will not exceed the run-off from the undeveloped site following the corresponding rainfall event. The approved drainage system shall be implemented in accordance with the approved detailed design prior to completion of the development.
The scheme to be submitted shall demonstrate that the surface water drainage system(s) are designed in accordance with the standards detailed in North Yorkshire County Council SuDS Design Guidance (or any subsequent update or replacement for that document).
14 Prior to the submission of any reserved matters application, Chapter F of the Environmental Statement (Ecology) shall be updated with the results of further surveys which are to be undertaken in relation to great crested newts, bats and breeding birds to a standard agreed with the Local Planning Authority. The results of these surveys will inform detailed mitigation which will be incorporated into the Mitigation (section 6) and Enhancement (section 7) Sections of the Ecology Chapter of the Environmental Statement and within the Woodland Management Plan and Landscaping Scheme, which must be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Works shall subsequently be implemented strictly in accordance with these plans.
15 Unless otherwise agreed by the Local Planning Authority, development other than that required to be carried out as part of an approved scheme of remediation must not commence until sections A to D have been complied with. If unexpected contamination is found after development has begun, development must be halted on that part of the site affected by the unexpected contamination to the extent specified by the Local Planning Authority in writing until section D has been complied with in relation to that contamination.
A. SITE CHARACTERISATION An investigation and risk assessment, in addition to any assessment provided with the planning application, must be completed in accordance with a scheme to assess the nature and extent of any contamination on the site, whether or not it originates on the site. The contents of the scheme are subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken by competent persons and a written report of the findings must be produced. The written report is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The report of the findings must include:
(i) a survey of the extent, scale and nature of contamination;
(ii) an assessment of the potential risks to: * human health, * property (existing or proposed) including buildings, crops, livestock, pets, woodland and service lines and pipes, * adjoining land, * groundwaters and surface waters * ecological systems * archaeological sites and ancient monuments;
(iii) an appraisal of remedial options, and proposal of the preferred option(s).
This must be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency's 'Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR 11'.
B. SUBMISSION OF REMEDIATION SCHEME A detailed remediation scheme to bring the site to a condition suitable for the intended use by removing unacceptable risks to human health, buildings and other property and the natural and historical environment must be prepared, and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The scheme must include all works to be undertaken, proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria, timetable of works and site management procedures. The scheme must ensure that the site will not qualify as contaminated land under Part2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 in relation to the intended use of the land after remediation.
C. IMPLEMENTATION OF APPROVED REMEDIATION SCHEME The approved remediation scheme must be carried out in accordance with its terms prior to the commencement of development other than that required to carry out remediation, unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Local Planning Authority must be given two weeks written notification of commencement of the remediation scheme works.
Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme, a verification report that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation carried out must be produced, and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.
D. REPORTING OF UNEXPECTED CONTAMINATION In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development that was not previously identified it must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority. An investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken in accordance with the requirement of section A, and where remediation is necessary a remediation scheme must be prepared in accordance with the requirements of section B, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.
Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a verification report must be prepared, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority in accordance with section C.
16 The details and recommendations contained within the revised noise report prepared by Hydrock (Reference C16 1369-ACO-EJ-20160721.PO3 dated July 2016) shall be implemented within the final design stage of the proposed units and a further noise report shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation of any unit to verify that that unit has been designed so as to take into account the noise map contained within the Hydrock report and design levels in BS8233:2014.
17 Details of the proposed lighting scheme shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority before the development hereby permitted commences. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
18 The site shall be developed with separate systems of drainage for foul and surface water.
19 No piped discharge of surface water from the application site shall take place until works to provide a satisfactory outfall, other than the local public sewerage, for surface water have been completed in accordance with details submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.
20 No development shall take place until details of the proposed means of disposal of foul water drainage and treatment for the whole site, including details of any balancing works, off-site works and phasing of the necessary infrastructure, have been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. Furthermore, unless otherwise approved in writing by the local planning authority, no buildings shall be occupied or brought into use prior to completion of the approved foul drainage works.
21 (a) No retained tree shall be cut down, uprooted or destroyed, nor shall any retained tree be topped or lopped other than in accordance with the approved plans and particulars, without the written approval of the local planning authority. Any topping or lopping approved shall be carried out in accordance with British Standard 3998 (2010) (Tree Work).
(b) If any retained tree is removed, uprooted or destroyed or dies, another tree shall be planted at the same place and that tree shall be of such size and species, and shall be planted at such time, as may be specified in writing by the local planning authority.
(c) The erection of fencing for the protection of any retained tree shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved plans and particulars before any equipment, machinery or materials are brought on to the site for the purposes of the development, and shall be maintained until all equipment, machinery and surplus materials have been removed from the site. Nothing shall be stored or placed in any area fenced in accordance with this condition and the ground levels within those areas shall not be altered, nor shall any excavation be made, without the written consent of the local planning authority.
In this condition "retained tree" means an existing tree which is to be retained in accordance with the approved plans and particulars; and paragraphs (a) and (b) above shall have effect until the expiration of two years from the completion of the development.
22 No works or development shall take place to facilitate the installation of the highway and cycle path until full details of all proposed replacement tree planting, and the proposed times of planting, have been approved in writing by the local planning authority, and all tree planting shall be carried out in accordance with those details and at those times. The number of trees lost shall be subject to survey and replaced at a minimum rate of 2:1 the type and species to have been first agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority and forming part of a wider woodland management plan for the site. Any replacement trees that fail within 5 years of planting shall be replaced by a tree of a similar type and species.
23 A landscape management plan, including long term design objectives, management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for all landscape areas shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, prior to the occupation of the development or any phase of the development, whichever is the sooner, for its permitted use. The landscape management plan shall be carried out as approved.
24 A comprehensive long-term woodland and ecological management plan for the woodlands across the red edge site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation of the site. The management plan shall include proposals for the management of pre-existing long-standing woodland and new planting associated with the current development. It shall include proposals to reconcile the requirement to maintain features of interest to wildlife with public access (including a risk assessment based management of the requirement for felling/surgery).
Reasons for Conditions:-
1 To safeguard the rights of control by the Local Planning Authority in respect of the reserved matters. 2 To ensure compliance with sections 91-94 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 3 To ensure the delivery of sustainable development and facilitate community involvement and informed decision making. 4 In accordance with Core Strategy Policy SG4 and to ensure safe and appropriate access and egress to the premises, in the interests of highway safety and the convenience of prospective users of the highway 5 In accordance with Core Strategy Policy SG4 and to ensure safe and appropriate access and egress to the premises, in the interests of highway safety and the convenience of prospective users of the highway 6 In accordance with policy SG4 and to provide for appropriate on-site vehicle facilities in the interests of highway safety and the general amenity of the development 7 In accordance with Core Strategy Policy SG4 and to ensure that these areas are kept available for their intended use in the interests of highway safety and the general amenity of the development. 8 In accordance with Core Strategy Policy SG4 and in the interests of the safety and convenience of highway users 9 In accordance with Core Strategy Policy SG4 and in the interests of the safety and convenience of highway users. 10 In accordance with Core Strategy Policy SG4 and in the interest of safety and convenience of highway users. 11 To safeguard the environment and mitigate climate change in accordance with Harrogate District Core Strategy Policy EQ1. 12 Any use other than that approved would be detrimental to the allocation of the strategic employment site. 13 To prevent the increased risk of flooding; to ensure the future maintenance of the sustainable drainage system, to improve and protect water quality and improve habitat and amenity. 14 Having regard to the ecological interests of the site. 15 To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors in accordance with policies SG4 and EQ1 of the Harrogate District Core Strategy. 16 In the interests of amenity. 17 In the interests of amenity. 18 To prevent pollution of the water environment. 19 To ensure that the site is properly drained and in order to prevent overloading, surface water is not discharged to the foul sewer network. 20 To ensure that no foul water discharges take place until proper provision has been made for their disposal 21 To safeguard the rights of control by the Local Planning Authority in these respects and in the interests of amenity. 22 To safeguard the rights of control by the Local Planning Authority in these respects and in the interests of amenity. 23 To ensure that the landscape design proposals are reflected in the quality of the works and materials that result in the final product 24 To ensure the long term management of the woodland in the interests of the amenities of the area
INFORMATIVES
1 The construction of the site shall follow the Guidance in Defra Construction Code of Practice for the Sustainable Use of Soils on Construction sites.
2 Technical advice regarding the proposed specification for the road crossing for the Public Bridleway can be obtained from North Yorkshire County Council Public Rights of Way maintenance team.
Public Rights of Way technical team North Yorkshire County Council Transport, Waste and Countryside Services County Hall Northallerton DL7 8 AH
3 Trees on the site to which this permission relates are subject to a Tree Preservation Order and may not be lopped, topped or felled without the prior written consent of the Borough Council, unless the tree work has already been approved under cover of a planning permission which is being implemented. Any person undertaking work to protected trees without written consent is liable to prosecution. Application forms are available from the Councils Department of Development Services.
4 A public right of way crosses the site to which this permission relates. The grant of planning permission does not entitle developers to obstruct a public right of way. Development, in so far as it affects a public right of way, should not be started, and the right of way should be kept open for public use, until the necessary order under section 247 or 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, for the diversion or extinguishment of the right of way, has come into effect. Nor should it be assumed that because planning permission has been granted an order will invariably be made or confirmed. Forms to apply to stop up/divert footpaths/bridleways in order to enable a development granted planning permission to be carried out may be obtained from the Councils' Department of Development Services.
Applicants are advised to contact North Yorkshire County Councils Access and Public Rights of Way team at County Hall, Northallerton via [email protected] to obtain up-to-date information regarding the line of the route of the way. The applicant should discuss with the Highway Authority any proposal for altering the route.