List Number 1 21 May 2020 North Moors National Park Authority

Hambleton District App No. NYM/2018/0039/FL Parish:

Proposal: construction of 4 no. dwellings with associated access, parking, garage/car ports, amenity space and landscaping works

Location: land to the west of Byland Road, Coxwold

Applicant: Newburgh Priory Estate, fao: Mr Stephen Wombwell, c/o agent

Agent: Savills UK Ltd, fao: Miss Lucy Stephenson, Savills, Ground Floor City Point, 29 King Street, Leeds, LS1 2HL

Date for Decision: 28 March 2018 Grid Ref: 453545 477273

Director of Planning’s Recommendation

Approval subject to the following conditions and an appropriate Section 106 Agreement/Unilateral Undertaking to ensure that the affordable housing proposed under application no. NYM/2018/0037/OU is completed prior to the commencement of this development, that all profits made from this development are invested back into the maintenance of the Newburgh Priory Estate, and that the applicants undertake the repairs required to the culvert:

1. TIME01 Standard Three Year Commencement Date 2. PLAN01 Strict Accordance With the Documentation Submitted or Minor Variations – Document No’s Specified 3. RSU00 The dwelling units hereby permitted, shall be used as principal residential dwellings (Class C3) and for no other purpose including any other use in Class C of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification). The properties shall be the only or principal home of the main occupant and they shall be occupied by the main occupant for at least 80% of the calendar year in the event that the main occupant occupies more than one property. The properties shall not be occupied by the main occupant as a second home. The occupants shall supply to the Local Planning Authority (within 14 days of the Local Planning Authority's request to do so) such information as the local planning authority may reasonably require in order to determine compliance with this condition. For the avoidance of doubt the properties shall not be used as single units of holiday letting accommodation. 4. WPDR01 Withdrawal of all PD Parts 1 & 2 and 14 Classes A to I (excludes Classes D-F) 5. RSUO04 Domestic Outbuildings – No Conversion to Accommodation – Inside Villages 6. GACS07 External Lighting – Submit Details 7. MATS02 Stone and Tiles to be Approved 8. MATS06 Stone Panel 9. MATS22 Pointing – New Development – Standard Mix 10. MATS30 Doors – Details of Construction to be Submitted 11. MATS40 Detailed Plans of Window Frames Required 12. MATS54 Trickle Vents Shall Not be incorporated into Windows

Page 2 List Number 1

Application No: NYM/2018/0039/FL

Conditions Continued

13. MATS00 The lintels and cills of all new windows hereby approved, together with any replacement lintels and cills, shall be of natural or reclaimed stone and shall be maintained in that condition in perpetuity. 14. MATS62 Window/Door Frames to be Painted Wood (white) 15. MATS70 Guttering Fixed by Gutter Spikes 16. MATS72 Black Coloured Rainwater Goods 17. MATS73 External Fixtures 18. DRGE01 Surface Water and Foul Drainage Details 19. HWAY06 Discharge of Surface Water 20. HWAY07 Private Access/Verge Crossings: Construction Requirements 21. HWAY00 No part of the development shall be brought into use until the approved vehicle parking, manoeuvring and turning areas have been constructed in accordance with the submitted drawing (ref. Proposed site plan dwg. 105 Rev E). Once created these areas shall be maintained clear of any obstruction and retained for their intended purpose at all times. 22. HWAY17 Garage Conversion to Habitable Room 23. HWAY18A Precautions to Prevent Mud on the Highway 24. HWAY24 On-site Parking, On-Site Storage and Construction Traffic During Development 25. LNDS14 Tree Survey Submitted 26. LNDS00 Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved full details of the positon and final specification of the cellular confinement tree protection system shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 27. MISC00 Prior to a commencement being made on the construction of the external walls of the development hereby approved, details shall be submitted to and approved in writing of the location of artificial bat roosts and bird boxes and where they will be incorporated within the fabric of the building. The roosts and boxes shall be installed prior to the completion of the development in accordance with the approved details and thereafter be so maintained 28. DRGE00 The development shall not commence until details of finished floor levels of the development hereby approved have been submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Finished Floor Levels of the dwellings should be set 300mm above adjacent ground levels. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme satisfying this condition.

Informatives

1. The proposed entrance to the development is partially along Public Footpath 404004 which raises concerns for the continued safe use for walkers during and post construction. Consequently no works are to be undertaken which will create an obstruction, either permanent or temporary, to the Public Right of Way adjacent to the proposed development.

Applicants are advised to contact the County Council’s Access and Public Rights of Way Manager at County Hall, Northallerton on 0845 8 727374 to obtain up-to- date information regarding the line of the route of the way. The applicant should discuss with the Highway Authority any proposals for altering the route. 2. Section 106 Agreement

Page 5 List Number 1

Application No: NYM/2018/0039/FL

Consultations

Parish – 5/3/2019 – Support in principle with the following reservations:- • Height should be kept to a minimum as views across the rear to Bank and several listed properties should be preserved. Dwellings should therefore be single storey or chalet-bungalow, the latter being more likely to attract young families. • Should be due diligence in addressing and resolving flooding problems.

10/5/2019 – Supports the application providing the flood risks are fully addressed.

14/6/2019 – Supports the revised planning application on this site with the reservation that a flood risk assessment is carried out as recommended and an assurance that any potential developer would pay due diligence in addressing the problems experienced in the past due to flooding.

10/12/2019 – No objections but one councillor would like the hedgerow to remain complete.

4/2/2020 – Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the amended details for this proposed development. The majority decision of Coxwold Parish Council is to support the application.

• Coxwold Parish Council has consistently supported limited housing development in the village. It takes the view that the village needs more young families who need houses to live in.

• It has consistently supported this proposed development and there has been a positive response to all requested changes and all questions posed have been positively answered.

• The proposed site is no longer rented out as an allotment by Newburgh Priory. Had this been the case when CPC response to the Local Plan was prepared it would have been considered for inclusion for housing development.

Ward Member –

Highways – 27/4/2018 – No objections subject to conditions

14/2/2018 – Environmental Health – No significant impact on local amenity so no objections or recommendations.

29/01/2020 – No objections - considered the potential impacts on amenity and likelihood of the development to cause a nuisance and consider that there will be no negative impact.

Lead Local Flood Authority –

18/11/2019 - The FRA identifies various issues relating to the culvert, in particular the sizing of the pipe. There are also sections of pipe with back fall and a collapsed outfall. These issues are noted in the FRA and recommends that the culvert and watercourse are repaired. However the affected areas are outside of the development extent and therefore assets become the responsibility of a 3rd party landowner/s.

By its own admission the Flood Risk Assessment states that flood risk due to structural failure, including blockage has not been addressed. To add to this the LLFA would say that the risk as a consequence of the undersized pipe has not been satisfactory assessed either.

Page 6 List Number 1

Application No: NYM/2018/0039/FL

Consultations continued

The applicant should assess the exceedance flows from the culvert as a result of being under capacity and therefore recommends that further assessment is required.

Finally, further to previous comments, although the site does not require a formal suds system as required by the NPPF, the LLFA still requires the applicant to demonstrate how surface water will be dealt with on site.

13/03/2019 - The submitted information from Brian Smith (MET Consultancy Group) appears to ask further question of the planning consultants rather than provide any meaningful solution to the flood risk and drainage issues. Having reviewed Paul Tweeds comments I maintain the LLFA’s position that insufficient information has been provided on this application.

09/03/2020 – The LLFA has no objection to the application subject to the following condition being applied to any permission granted. Have reviewed the following additional information submitted by the applicant:

• Flood Risk Assessment/Site at Byland Road, Coxwold, Curtins Ref: 072809-CUR-00-XX- RP-C-92001, Revision V01, 30th September 2019 • Exceedance Flow Routes, Curtins Ref: 072809-CUR-XX-XX-DR-C-9200-P01, Revision P01 Dated 22nd January 2020

In addition to the above, we have also reviewed the third party responses by the local residents. In particular, those responses that provide photographs of recent flooding events.

This application is considered a minor application, and would not normally be commented on by the NYCC in its capacity as Lead Local Flood Authority. According to the current flood risk mapping, the site is not located in Flood Zones 2 or 3, and not shown to be at risk of surface water flooding. The application site is less than 1ha in area therefore a flood risk assessment would not have been required.

Notwithstanding this, the LLFA was asked by the LPA to comment on the application given that concerns had been raised about flood risk. The LLFA has no records of the flooding in this part of Coxwold – probably as no internal flooding was reported. It is important to note that flooding of garages is not recognised as internal flooding. Given the low threshold levels, garages tend to be much more vulnerable to flooding than the habitable rooms within properties. The fact that the LLFA has no record of flooding does not mean to say that no flooding has occurred in this area. Only that no flooding has been reported to NYCC. The photographic evidence submitted by third parties, does show flooding on Byland Road and to the playing fields to the east, but the pictures showing the application site itself are inconclusive in proving whether the site has a history of flooding. On this basis the LLFA recommended that a flood risk assessment be prepared for the site with specific reference made to the culvert.

In preparing the Flood Risk Assessment, the assessment should be commensurate to the scale and nature of the development site in accordance with the NPPF Technical Guidance (July 2018) and Planning Practice Guidance (PPG). In reviewing the assessment the LLFA in its comments dated 18 November 2019 stated that it was satisfied with the report methodology, and acknowledged the issue with the culvert downstream of the development site. However the FRA had failed to show where surcharging of the culvert would occur and the associated exceedance flow routes.

Consequently the applicant submitted an Exceedance Flow Routes plan (072809-CUR-XX- XX-DR-C-9200-P01). Having reviewed the CCTV survey and the commentary prepared

Page 7 List Number 1

Application No: NYM/2018/0039/FL

Consultations continued within the supporting FRA report, the suggested surcharged manhole has the lowest cover level of 62.64 and is upstream of the identified blockages, and is therefore the logical manhole that will surcharge first. This does not mean to say that this will be the only surcharged manhole, as this depends on the surrounding water levels, but the submitted plan is based on sound assumptions.

What is evident from the photographs, particularly the fourth and last photographs submitted by Mrs C Chidwick on 1 March 2018, is that the north western corner and the western boundary of the site appears to be dry, which suggest that the site is not being flooded from the small stream to the north west before flowing into the culvert. The photograph does confirm that the track and field to the north are partially submerged in water and suggest that flows from the stream does follow the direction shown on the current surface water flood maps. Clearly there are issues that are exacerbating the flood extent as identified within the FRA report; however, precedent in planning law has already been set that states that there is no onus on any developer to remedy an existing flooding situation outside of the development site limits.

Based on the current submitted information in the form of the FRA reports and photographic evidence, the question as to whether the site floods or not is still inconclusive. There is no compelling evidence to suggest that the site floods extensively. Having reviewed the site levels provided on the topographical survey against the pictures submitted, should the site be at risk of flooding, the depth of flooding is likely to be minimal and no greater than 150mm. Providing that ground levels at the site are not raised, the impact of flood risk elsewhere will be negligible and as such, the LLFA has no objection to the proposed development.

In order to ensure that the proposed plots are not at undue risk of flooding the LLFA recommends that the a condition is applied, requiring finished floor levels to be set at least 300mm above the average ground levels on site.

As the site is for four dwellings, this does not meet the threshold for a major development. The applicant therefore does not have to provide a sustainable drainage system in accordance with Paragraph 165 of the NPPF. However it is understood from the correspondence submitted by the applicant that proposed development will be drainage by a formal drainage system. In the interest of reducing any impacts from the scheme, the LLFA recommends that runoff rates from the site should be restricted as low as practically possible.

Yorkshire Water – No observations or comments are required.

Police – Traffic –

Environment Agency –

Advertisement/Site Notice Expiry Date - 9 March 2018

Others –

20/2/2018 – Dr Hilary Arksey, 15 East View, Coxwold – In principle I support the development as to continue thriving, the village needs new blood. This would bring in new residents, hopefully of a younger age group. Flooding has been an occasional issue in the past but I believe that has been addressed by the Parish Council. I would hope that the new houses would not be too expensive so would be attractive to middle income earners.

Page 8 List Number 1

Application No: NYM/2018/0039/FL

Others continued

25/2/2018 – Martin and Paula Stringer, 3 Orchard Cottage, Coxwold – Concerned with the impact on significant surface water flood risk. I have experienced surface water flooding of my garage on a number of occasions.

4/3/2019 – Submit photos of flooding in 2015. While I appreciate that the flooding of 2015 was nationwide, the flooding of the playing field was the worst I have seen. The water levels shown in the photos of Byland Road depict levels that we have come to expect when there is standing water on the proposed site for development.

6/2/2020 – I write again to express my concerns. I live opposite the Old Chapel and have experienced the effects of a flooded property on more than one occasion and have also experience of having to protect my property from flooding several times. On each occasion the proposed development site was flooded and the culvert unable to cope with the amount of water. I find it hard to believe that the facts identified by myself, other residents/witnesses along with the report from the Lead Local Flooding Authority have been ignored by the developers. I had submitted photos in previous correspondence of the flooding in December 2015 and also pointed towards photographs published in the Advertiser of a flooded Byland Road on a different occasion. I believe that the land is not a suitable development site and would pose a flood risk to any property built upon it and increase the already present flood risk to my own and neighbouring properties.

1/3/2019 – Mrs Carey Chidwick, 1 Orchard Cottage, Coxwold – Our road is liable to flooding after prolonged rain. At times of heavy rainfall, the stream bordering the proposed buildings overflows, bringing down onto the road a significant amount of silt and debris. The current drain, immediately in front of the site, also backs up, adding to the problem. I am concerned that this new construction will exacerbate this.

4/6/2019 – Very concerned that the risk of flooding has, I feel, been so played down in this application as to have been misrepresented. All of us who have opposed the plans have submitted photographs showing clearly how seriously we can be affected during periods of heavy and prolonged rain. The planned dwellings could themselves be flooded but the construction of new hard surfaces can only lead to an increase in the volume of water flowing on to the road and into our garages and homes. The four families who live in the four Orchard Cottages all have our boilers sited in our garages and therefore our heating and hot water will be at risk. There are elderly people (I would include my husband and me in that category) and young.

It seems to me that previous objections to the original plans, and to the further two revisions, have not been adequately addressed and I continue to contend that the flood risk to existing dwellings would preclude development on that land.

8/11/2019 – The Flood Risk Assessment is lacking in several ways. The report’s assertion that the development site is not subject to flooding is inaccurate. Residents have demonstrated that the development area does flood. As it is a field, it must absorb, and allow to soak away, a lot of water. If it is developed and covered with hard standing it will result in increased amounts of water’s running off the new site and straight into our properties.

3/02/2020 – It is very disappointing that the Parish Council has seen fit to support this without speaking to those of us who would be most affected by it. I am also concerned that the representatives of Newburgh Priory have not once acknowledged the concerns of those of us who are worried about flood risks.

Page 9 List Number 1

Application No: NYM/2018/0039/FL

Others continued

The agent is mistaken in the accuracy of the location of Green’s Beck and declares that flooding is not the result of the condition of the culvert. This is in direct contradiction of the report by the LLFA dated 18 November 2019 which states that previous problems with the sizing of the culvert pipe and damage to the watercourse have not yet been addressed and there is no information on how excess surface water will be addressed. Furthermore, the report states that structural failure, including blockage, has not been addressed and that the risk as a consequence of the undersized pipe has not been addressed, either.

My husband and I remain opposed to the proposed dwellings and would like to see evidence that these flooding issues will be addressed and that our concerns will not be ignored by the proposers.

5/3/2018 – Anne Le Gassicke, 4 Orchard Cottages, Coxwold – Object as will spoil my view of the upper parts of Coxwold and the Church. Also, the power cables were undergrounded to improve the appearance of the village. If the houses are built then I hope existing hedgerow is kept and the buildings will be single storey.

5/3/2018 – Simon Le Gassicke, 4 Orchard Cottages, Coxwold – The proposals will severely damage the appearance of our village, creating an abrupt entrance to an urban area. The site is prone to flooding but a soakaway is suggested! There has been considerable growth of our village in recent decades and development is now near saturation. Hedges and trees should be retained.

Although I appreciate the advantages of proposed development of Newburgh Priory I am not sure Coxwold needs to be sacrificed rather than seek an alternative form of finance. 30/01/2020 – The additional information from the agent belittles the flood risk. The previous FRA identifies problems that have not been addressed and there is little indication of how surface water will be dealt with.

5/3/2019 – G Bradley, GRB Auto Engineers, Byland Road Garage, Coxwold – This will take away the view of the upper village and the church. The site is also at high risk of flooding. I also hope that the existing trees and hedgerow will be retained.

5/3/2019 - Dr G S Tune, The Old Prison House, Coxwold – The proposal will detract from the appearance of the village, hinder the outlook, potentially worsen the flooding problem, will intrude into the conservation area and not enhance the appeal of the village. It also diminishes the recent successful attempts to improve the appearance of Coxwold.

11/3/2018 – Mr Roy McGhie at 2 Orchard Cottage, Coxwold – Object for the following reasons: • Contrary in principle to Core Policy J and the planning policies set out in the NPPF. • In 2016 an application for a new house on the eastern approach to the village was refused because ‘a dwelling on this site would detract from the character and setting of the village • The site is located at the entrance to the village and allows views across the long linear gardens which define the character of the core of this medieval village. • Allowing this proposal will make it harder in future to refuse applications in the gardens to the west of the site causing erosion of the character of the Conservation Area. • It is impossible to tell if allowing open market housing in direct contradiction of National Park planning policy is the best way to achieve repair of the Priory.

Should permission be granted, a local needs survey should be undertaken to identify the number of additional properties suitable for the village, there should be a local occupancy clause on any new properties, the flooding issue needs resolving, retention of all existing hedgerow, the footpath to the north of the site is a popular village footpath so careful

Page 10 List Number 1

Application No: NYM/2018/0039/FL

Others continued

consideration needs to be made about cars using the footpath; the mature trees to the northern end of the site should receive appropriate protection from new development.

28/01/2020 - Regarding flooding, I am disappointed that the applicant has chosen to ignore the LLFA report (18/11/19) which clearly states that flood risk due to structural failure (of the culvert), including blockage has not been addressed. The LLFA report points out that the risk of the undersized pipe has not been satisfactorily assessed either. I note that the ‘exceedance flow routes’ schematic accompanying the applicant’s update is based on the 2015 flood, and not the 2012 flood which was even more severe. 15/05/2018 – NG Fulton, The Old Chapel, Coxwold (now deceased) - The field has flooded on several occasions and we have had to pump out surface water which came from the site into our garden and conservatory. Flooding frequently occurs after heavy rain, when the whole field can be under several inches of water. Everyone who lives on Byland Road is concerned that if four houses are built on the proposed site, with the consequent hard standing, the flooding problem will be exacerbated. This letter is also supported by witness statements from residents of Byland Road and elsewhere, to the occurrence of flooding after heavy rain. 27/02/2018 – Main objection is because of the increased flooding risk to my house, the village hall and other properties. I also object on more general grounds. • The map submitted showing the areas subject to flooding is not accurate. Floodwater has come into my house from the field not the road. The field floods as a result of the overflowing stream which runs along the northern boundary. Building here will exacerbate the flood risk. • The field is a greenfield site which has never been built on, probably because of the flood risk. • Further development will lead to urbanisation, this is not a low density development. • Single storey dwellings would retain the views. • Concern that will cause damage to the landmark tree (136ft sycamore), and removal of part of the hedge for pedestrian entrances. • The village has very limited amenities and poor bus service. • The Parish Council have attempted remedial work at great expense, including grills in the stream to collect washed down debris. Without this intervention the stream would overflow its bank even more frequently. • If permission is granted conditions should be attached to ensure major flood prevention work is undertaken.

13/6/2019 – Moira Fulton, The Old Chapel, Coxwold – My husband, who is now deceased, wrote a detailed letter dated concerning the original and amended application. I trust that his observations will still be taken into consideration when the planning decision is made.

Having read the new amended application dated 21st May 2019, I would like to add that:-. • Though two houses are now single storey, the other two are still considerably higher than the adjacent property, The Old Chapel. • Plot 4 now has an extension to provide a 4th bedroom which will overshadow the garden of the adjacent property & is very close to the boundary line. • From the plan it appears that the hedge on the north side will be removed, apart from short sections at each end & will be replaced with a fence. This is presumably to provide parking spaces & will only add to the suburban aspect of the development. • I note there are now four breaks in the hedge on the Byland road side of the site to provide pedestrian access for the properties. The plan does not show paths across the grass verge but they will inevitably be installed if the access gates are used. The four breaks in the hedge are unnecessary & visually intrusive & will further damage the

Page 11 List Number 1

Application No: NYM/2018/0039/FL

Others continued

appearance of the entry to the Village. Pedestrian access could be by way of the access road.

31/10/2019 – In the last 37 years the field has flooded at least five times. On the last two occasions water flowed from the field into my garden & in 2015 also into the conservatory. We have a pump used to pump out the field and have sandbags kept by the entrance to the field.

I could go through FRA line by line challenging the accuracy of some of the statements but my statements & those of other residents who have witnessed the flooding should be accepted as a truthful representation of the vulnerability of the site to periodic flooding.

31/01/2020 – This application to build on a site known to flood will be of no benefit to the inhabitants of Byland Road who live in the National Park and will only provide a temporary solution to the financial problems of Newburgh Priory which is outside the NYMNP and therefore not the responsibility of the Park. There is no obvious need or demand for further properties in Coxwold. This development will block the view on the approach to the village of the gable end of the Old Chapel will have a detrimental effect on the appearance of what is generally considered to be one of the more attractive villages in the NYMNP.

Who will benefit if this development is permitted. It will not be the inhabitants of Byland Road who will be under increased risk of flooding and it will not enhance the appearance of Coxwold for tourists. House no 4 is considerably higher than the Old Chapel and will overlook my garden resulting in loss of privacy and light.

10/02/2020 - As you will be aware four out of five Parish Councillors are in favour of the proposed development but many in the village are not. Attach a letter signed by people who have lived in the village for at least 20 years reinforcing the problem of flooding of the site which has not been addressed either by the developers or by Coxwold Parish Council.

The field in question is not suitable for housing development because it is subject to periodic flooding, and dispute the claims that it doesn’t. As residents we can attest that it has flooded on a number of occasions in the last 30 years. On each occasion residents have had to take measures to defend their properties by pumping water from the field, digging channels to drain the water onto the road and obtaining sandbags. Despite this evidence the developers continue to deny this. The assertions made by the developer contradict evidence from residents and the LLFA. In our opinion and on the basis of the evidence this field is not suitable for development.

18/2/2018 – Tom Squire, The Lair, Coxwold – No objection to the principle of providing additional housing in Coxwold, I would like to register the following observations:

• The proposed access to the site off the green lane is unsuitable given the history of flooding in that area and the impact of the construction of a tarmac access road on the root system of the historic tree abutting the north-western corner of the site. Indeed the history of flooding brings the use of the site for housing into question. The proposed access point would excessively urbanise the green lane. • The scale of the proposed development is disproportionate to its surroundings. The proposed development of two full storeys plus loft space is excessive and so the ridge height should be reduced with the top floor of accommodation partially occupying eaves space. This would bring the development within the scale of its surroundings and reduce the impact on the village.

Page 12 List Number 1

Application No: NYM/2018/0039/FL

Others continued

• Insufficient consideration has been given to Grade II listed Elphin House and The Lair. This particularly applies to plot 4 which abuts them. The implication is clear - Elphin House’s Grade II Listing is insignificant in the context of Grade I listed Newburgh Priory and cannot be acceptable as a justification for the disregard of the impact on Elphin House. • The provision of a turning head on the western boundary conflicts with the stated objective of retaining the hedgerow.

As mentioned at the start of this email, I am not opposed to the provision of additional housing in Coxwold but the proposal for the site should be amended to reduce the scale and safeguard against the use of the site for abusive further development of neighbouring sites under Newburgh’s ownership.

8/5/2019 – The development proposed is in an area where regular flooding occurs and the amount of new hardsurfacing will increase run-off. It is wholly unacceptable to increase flood risk whilst simultaneously transferring the responsibilities for flood prevention away from the owner of the green lane.

23/11/2019 – I have reviewed the additional drainage information, and note the comment by the agent that the recent rains resulted in no surface water flooding. This is simply not the case and I refer to my previous email with associated photos which were taken after a period of light rain and the (recently expanded) culvert was full to capacity. The Green Lane also suffered surface water flooding.

31/10/2019 – Arthur Watters, 8 Hambleton Garth, Easingwold – I have been requested to reinforce the fact that the field next to The Old Chapel and the garden of the Old Chapel are liable to flood. I know this as I helped Graham Fulton pump out the water from the garden. I am a little unsure of the exact year but we left Coxwold in February 2014 so it will have been before this date.

28/2/2018 - Jozef & Vivian Mycielski at Elphin House, Coxwold - We live at Elphin House, a Grade 2 listed building, the garden of which adjoins the application site.

We understand the need for new houses to be provided in Coxwold and for capital investment in the Newburgh Priory Estate. However, we are keen to ensure that this is achieved with as little harm to the village as possible. Have concerns as to the scale of the houses proposed but understand that two-storey dwellings will generate a higher sale value. They will, however, have a greater visual impact. Also have concerns regarding flooding; the proposal does not provide details of a drainage scheme. This may be something in respect of which further details are being provided however.

As to impact, the largest of the houses would appear to have a significant impact on the The Old Chapel but this is really a matter for those living there to raise. There will be some impact on the setting of Elphin House, in longer views and also some overlooking of its garden. However, our main concern is to ensure that the current mature planting is maintained. However, it does appear from the site plan that a large section of the hedge adjoining Elphin House will be removed to accommodate visitor parking and a spur. If permission were to be granted we would ask that the whole of this hedgerow is retained.

Page 13 List Number 1

Application No: NYM/2018/0039/FL

Others continued

We also have concerns about the impact of the proposed access on the mature tree which abuts it. The groundworks will be very close to the tree and its root system and it would be very sad, and would detract from the character of the Conservation Area and this entrance to the village, if it were to be lost. If permission were to be granted then once again we would ask that steps are taken to ensure that the tree is retained and protected.

We accept that there is a balance to be struck between the impact of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, on its neighbours and on the setting of Elphin House, and the benefit it will bring in terms of funding essential repair of the Newburgh Priory Estate which is acknowledged as a heritage asset of importance.

If all the concerns raised as to the impact of the development can be overcome to the Council’s satisfaction leading to the grant of planning permission, then it is essential that conditions are imposed to ensure that the impact of the development is kept to a minimum, hedges and trees are retained, and that a suitable agreement is put in place to ensure that the capital generated from the development of the site is reinvested in the Estate.

Background

This application relates to a grassed parcel of land enclosed by a hedge located at the northern gateway to Coxwold, on the western side of Byland Road, opposite Coxwold Village Hall and the commercial garage. The site is within the Coxwold Conservation Area. A public footpath runs along the northern boundary of the site.

The application seeks planning permission for the construction of four ‘Principal Residence’ occupancy dwellings ( a tenure promoted in larger villages in the emerging Local Plan), in the form of one pair of two storey and one pair of single storey dwellings, fronting onto Byland Road. Pedestrian access only would be created at the front, via two newly created gaps in the hedgerow which abuts the pavement. Vehicular access and parking would be provided to the rear with an attached double garage being provided for the pair of two storey properties.

The two storey pair (plots 3 & 4) would measure 21.5m long x 7m deep with a height to the eaves of 4.7m and to the ridge of 7.3m. Plot 4 would have a two storey outshot at the rear and a single storey double garage (providing a single garage each for plots 3 and 4). These two units would have living room, open plan dining room and kitchen and utility at ground floor with Plot 4 having four bedrooms and plot 3 having three bedrooms.

Page 14 List Number 1

Application No: NYM/2018/0039/FL

Background continued

Plots 1 & 2 would be single storey measuring 18.2m long x 7m deep and 2.55m to the eaves and 5.15m to the ridge. These would be two bedroom properties with living room, kitchen and bathroom all at ground floor.

All of the dwellings would be clad in natural stone with slate roofs with white painted timber windows.

In terms of external space, the properties would have small front gardens with parking and access at the rear (total of nine spaces including garaging).

The proposal has been submitted by Newburgh Priory Estate as a means to provide the finances required to repair and maintain the core heritage assets of the Newburgh Priory Estate (Newburgh Priory itself is a Grade 1 Listed Tudor building). The Priory and core part of the estate are located approximately 600m from the National Park boundary. The Estate owns land on both sides of the National Park boundary. Other applications to support the Priory have been made to Council. This application comprises one of two applications submitted by the Estate for housing development within Coxwold (the other being application ref. no. NYM/2018/0037/OU for three affordable dwellings which has been approved under delegated powers).

In support of the application, the applicant’s agent has provided the following supporting information:-

The Estate has identified a need to develop appropriate viable uses for the redundant core buildings within the Estate to ensure a sound economic future and to help provide the opportunity to repair, conserve and bring back into working use a number of heritage assets within the estate. This is set out within the 2011 Newburgh Priory Masterplan, and through this plan it is proposed to make permanent and expand the existing wedding business run from the site.

Consequently a planning application was submitted to and approved by Hambleton District Council to convert the existing stables and back courting buildings to provide visitor and wedding accommodation, along with extensions and conversion of an existing building to create a new function suite for weddings, parties, corporate events, storage and estate office. These works are proposed to provide financial security to sustain this nationally significant heritage asset. However a source of funding is required to undertake works to repair and conserve these buildings.

This current application for four dwellings comprises part of a wider development programme, including an application at the southern end of the village (within the National Park) for an affordable housing scheme, and two separate applications outside the National Park, within Hambleton District Council, for housing development at Hall Farm, Oulston and High Lions Farm at .

Together, it is anticipated that these proposals would generate essential funds to undertake the works to the buildings at the main Priory Site, as approved by Hambleton District Council. These works will be undertaken in a phased way, with works having started to the Estate Office building.

Page 15 List Number 1

Application No: NYM/2018/0039/FL

Main Issues Local Development Plan Policies

Core Policy A seeks to ensure that new development conserves and enhances the Park’s special qualities; with priority being given to ensuring development does not detract from the quality of life of local residents and supports the character of a settlement.

Core Policy G of the NYM Local Development Plan seeks to ensure that the landscape, historic assets and cultural heritage of the National Park are conserved and enhanced, with particular protection being given to those elements which contribute to the character and setting of Conservation Areas, Listed Buildings, Historic Parks and Gardens or Scheduled Monuments and other sites of archaeological importance.

Core Policy J seeks to ensure the provision of a mixture of housing types and tenure to maintain the vitality of local communities, consolidate support for services and facilities and support the delivery of more affordable housing. This is to be achieved through locating all open market housing, including new build and converted units to the Local Service Centre of Helmsley and the Service Villages, and supporting the development of local needs housing on infill plots within the main built up area of the local service villages and other villages such as Coxwold.

Development Policy 2 states that development will only be permitted where it will not lead to an increase in flood risk elsewhere.

Development Policy 3 seeks to maintain and enhance the distinctive character of the National Park by ensuring that the siting, layout and density of development preserves or enhances views into and out of the site; that the scale, height, massing and design are compatible with surrounding buildings; that the standards of design are high; that there is satisfactory landscaping and that the design takes into account the safety, security and access needs for all potential users of the development.

Development Policy 4 of the Local Development Plan seeks to ensure that development within or immediately adjacent to a Conservation Area either preserves or enhances the character and appearance or setting of the area.

There are no Policies contained with the Local Development Plan relating to Enabling Development in relation to Historic Assets.

National Planning Policy Framework

Paragraph 202, Chapter 16 of the NPPF states that Local Planning Authorities should assess whether the benefits of a proposal for enabling development, which would otherwise conflict with planning policies but which would secure the future conservation of a heritage asset, outweigh the dis-benefits of departing from those policies.

Draft Local Plan

Strategic Policy B seeks to permit small scale housing development in the smaller villages such as Coxwold to meet local and affordable needs.

Strategic Policy C seeks to ensure high quality design that will make a positive contribution to the local environment, good quality materials, and complement the form of the settlement.

Page 16 List Number 1

Application No: NYM/2018/0039/FL

Main Issues continued

Policy ENV1 states that there is a presumption in favour of the retention of existing trees of value in all developments.

Policy ENV5 states that new development will only be permitted where it does not increase the risk of flooding elsewhere.

Strategic Policy I and Policy ENV11 seek to ensure that all development affecting the historic environment should make a positive contribution to the cultural heritage and local distinctiveness of the National Park, safeguarding heritage assets such as Conservation Areas.

Policy CO8 permits local occupancy or affordable housing on suitable small sites (capable of accommodating no more than two dwellings) within the main built up area of the smaller villages such as Coxwold.

The emerging Local Plan also introduces the concept of new housing as a ‘principal residence’ in the larger villages although Coxwold is not a larger village it is a smaller village where new housing would be limited to ‘local occupancy’ unless material circumstances indicate otherwise.

There was a Policy (ENV 2) contained with the draft Local Development Plan relating to enabling development for Historic Assets, although this was not carried through to the finally submitted plan and was replaced with text referring instead to the extant good quality Enabling Development guidance produced by Historic .

Enabling Development

Typically the benefits of enabling development are the generation of funds that will be used to pay for work to a Listed Building or other heritage asset, usually one on an ‘At Risk’ list that is in pressing need of substantial repairs, and to provide a long-term solution.

Historic England provides detailed online advice regarding enabling development in the context of the historic environment and advises that it is development that would be outside of policy but for the fact that it would bring heritage benefits sufficient to justify it being carried out, and which could not otherwise be achieved.

They advise that a typical example would be the construction of houses where planning policy would normally prohibit them, the profits from which would pay for repairs to a heritage asset. They go on to advise that the heritage benefits of the proposed development should outweigh the dis-benefits of departing from the development plan or from national planning policies.

As enabling development is, by definition, undesirable in at least some respects, Historic England has produced very thorough guidance (Enabling Development – The Conservation of Significant Places) on the sorts of situations in which it may, or may not, be appropriate.

The applicant’s agent has provided financial information setting out the ‘heritage deficit’ and has advised that whilst the land receipt for the proposals would be unlikely to meet the overall heritage deficit, they would provide sufficient funds to enable fundamental high priority repair works to the fabric of the Grade 1 Listed Building (Newburgh Priory) which in turn would allow for the conversion and implementation of the wedding and events business which would then provide a reliable long term income to allow continual maintenance.

Page 17 List Number 1

Application No: NYM/2018/0039/FL

Main Issues continued

Such proposals are never straightforward and in this case it is further complicated by the fact that the Heritage Asset to which this enabling development relates is situated just outside the National Park boundary. However, the Priory itself does contribute to the local economy in terms of generating tourism in the area, for example, accommodation and refreshment facilities and its wider estate encompasses this part of the National Park, including Coxwold itself.

In this case, the development of this amount of housing on the application site is contrary to the Authority’s spatial housing policies (as it proposes four dwellings rather than one/two (CS&DP/LP respectively) and their occupancy is to be controlled as principal residence rather than local occupancy which would normally apply in settlements such as Coxwold). However, the design of the development has been carefully considered, with a number of amendments required by Officers in order to reach a scheme that is not considered to have a detrimental impact on the character of the Conservation Area. Furthermore, this proposal has been submitted in conjunction with the applicant being agreeable to provide land for an affordable housing scheme at the other end of the village that would help to meet the housing need identified in a recent housing needs survey undertaken by the rural housing enabler and is in full compliance with the Authority’s policies in encouraging rural exception site housing. One of the biggest challenges in delivering affordable housing is finding a willing landowner.

Design

The design of the development has been carefully considered in order to reflect and conserve the character of the Conservation Area and the locality.

Roof slates rather than pantiles are proposed in order to reflect the character of the roofscape of Thirsk Road, the main village street in Coxwold which are dark and recessive. It is considered that slate would be less likely to visually compete with that rooflscape which forms an important feature of the Conservation Area. Natural stone and timber windows are also proposed.

The two pairs of semi-detached properties would also be of different heights with a step down from two storeys to single storey, which helps to reduce the bulk and scale of the proposals.

It is considered that the final design and materials proposed would be appropriate in this location.

Conservation Area

The application site is located within the Coxwold Conservation Area with the boundary running almost immediately to the north of the site.

Significant amendments have been negotiated by Officers, with advice from the Authority’s Building Conservation Team, in order to achieve a scheme which would conserve the character of the Conservation Area.

It is considered that the revised proposals represent an improvement in design and form in terms of architectural character and relationship with Byland Road, creating a more cohesive arrangement of two pairs of cottages, with the smaller block being subservient in scale.

Page 18 List Number 1

Application No: NYM/2018/0039/FL

Main Issues continued

Part of the character of the Conservation Area are the views from Byland Road towards the rear of houses on Thirsk Bank, with their roofs stepping down reflecting the hillside geography, surmounted at the top of the hill by the distinctive octagonal tower of the Grade I listed St Michael’s Church, along with the sense of openness of the crofts lying to the east of the site.

It is considered that the layout proposed, with the development at the frontage of the site, and part single storey, would enable views of Thirsk Bank to be retained as the village is approached from the north, although views immediately adjacent the Chapel would be obscured.

In terms of design and materials, it is proposed to use natural stone and slate, in keeping with the character of the area.

Affordable Housing

This application does not include the provision of any affordable housing; however, there is a separate planning application recently determined under delegated officer powers (NYM/2018/0037/OU) which sought outline approval for three affordable dwellings on a site at the southern end of the village.

That application has also been submitted by the Estate but the site is likely to be sold to an affordable housing provider to pursue the development.

As the application for four principal residence dwellings is contrary to Policy provisions, and only being considered acceptable as a form of enabling development, it is considered that permission could only be granted if there was also development meeting the needs of the local community. Consequently, it is considered that the development should not be implemented without surety that the affordable housing will be delivered. Therefore, it is recommended that the applicants enter into an appropriate Section 106 Agreement/Unilateral Undertaking to ensure that the affordable housing is approved and completed prior to the development being considered here is commenced (as well as the profits being directed to restoration of Listed Buildings on the Estate).

The Rural Housing Enabler has undertaken a housing needs survey which identifies a small need in the locality and one Registered Social Landlord (RSL) has been approached who has suggested they might be interested in purchasing the other site.

Residential Amenity

The front corner of Plot 4, which comprises a two storey dwelling with rear outshot and single storey garage to rear would measure 6.3m to the north of the adjacent dwelling, The Old Chapel. This would mean that the large side windows of the Chapel would not be obstructed. Furthermore, as the proposed development would be to the north of the Chapel, the proposed development, whilst adjacent the rear garden, would not have an overbearing impact or result in an unacceptable loss of daylight to that adjacent property.

Drainage

Surface water flooding is the primary concern of local residents, who have submitted substantial evidence regarding previous flooding events in the locality.

Page 19 List Number 1

Application No: NYM/2018/0039/FL

Main Issues continued

The applicant’s agent is of the view that surface water flooding is not an issue and is willing to accept a condition to ensure the repair works to the culvert are carried out.

However, the Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) has advised that any issues relating to the flood risk cannot be conditioned as these need to be proved before any development works take place and has advised that no formal planning approval should be granted until these issues have been satisfactorily addressed.

The LLFA has advised that there are various issues relating to the culvert, in particular the sizing of the pipe and recommends that the culvert and watercourse are repaired. The Flood Risk Assessment states that flood risk due to structural failure, including blockage has not been addressed and consequently they would say that the risk as a consequence of the undersized pipe has not been satisfactory assessed either. The LLFA therefore advised that the applicant needed to assess the exceedance flows from the culvert as a result of being under capacity and recommends that further assessment was required. Whilst the site does not require a formal suds system the LLFA still required the applicant to demonstrate how surface water will be dealt with on site.

In response additional flood route information has now been submitted by a drainage consultant on behalf of the applicant, showing the flood routes and an assessment of flood depth in relation to site levels. The LLFA have considered this information and have now confirmed that they have no objection to the proposals, providing finished floor levels are raised by 300mm.

Trees

None of the trees within or adjacent to the site are protected by Tree Preservation Orders, but they do fall under Conservation Area protection. There are two sycamore trees immediately adjacent the northern boundary of the site which are of landscape character and three smaller trees at the southern end of the site.

Detailed Arboricultural Impact Assessment, Tree Protection Plan and Arboricultural Method Statement have been submitted with the application setting out the tree protection measures in relation to these trees.

None of the proposed dwellings are within the root protection area or crown spread of the trees. However, a no dig cellular confinement system is proposed for the sections of the access drive that do fall within the root protection area.

It is considered that whilst there may be a risk of some impact on the trees, this will be minimised by the no dig driveway and the proposed working methods.

Ecology

The landscaping scheme has been amended in accordance with the advice of the Authority’s Ecologist in order to reduce the number of openings being created in the front boundary hedge, to minimise harm to the available habitat to this valuable wildlife corridor at the edge of the village.

Rights of Way

A public footpath runs along the northern edge of the site which would be partly shared with the new access road. However, the footpath would not be obstructed by the development.

Page 20 List Number 1

Application No: NYM/2018/0039/FL

Conclusion

Whilst the proposed development would be contrary to adopted and not strictly in accordance with emerging Policy provisions, it would, in conjunction with the proposed legal agreement to ensure the development of the affordable housing site, provide a range of affordable and principal residency dwellings within the village of Coxwold, which would benefit the local community and meet one of the key objectives of the new local plan to help address declining population in the National Park through higher housing delivery.

The development would also contribute to the securing of a sum of monies to be used in the essential repair of a designated heritage asset, albeit just outside the National Park boundary.

In view of the above, it is considered that whilst the scheme is contrary to Policy, it would not harm the character and setting of the village of Coxwold or its Conservation Area and on balance is considered to be acceptable. Consequently approval is recommended.

Pre-commencement Conditions

Condition(s) 17, 18, 19, 22, 23 and 25 are pre-commencement conditions and have been agreed in writing with the applicant/agent.

Contribution to Management Plan Objectives

Approval is considered likely to help meet Policy C10 and E7 which seek to ensure all new development will be of high quality design and conserve and enhance the built heritage and conserve and enhance heritage assets and their settings.

Explanation of how the Authority has Worked Positively with the Applicant/Agent

The Authority’s Officers have appraised the scheme against the Development Plan and other material considerations and recommended changes to the proposal including the scale and design of the proposed dwellings, so as to deliver sustainable development.