Date: 8Th March 2018 Our Ref: APC00004 Planning Policy Team, Harrogate Borough Council, PO Box 787, Harrogate, HG1 9RW

Addison Planning Consultants Ltd

Date: 8th March 2018 Our Ref: APC00004 Planning Policy Team, Harrogate Borough Council, PO Box 787, Harrogate, HG1 9RW

Dear Sir/Madam,

RE: HARROGATE DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN PUBLICATION DRAFT 2018

RE: DRAFT POLICY GS1: PROVIDING NEW HOMES AND JOBS

RE: DRAFT POLICY GS2: GROWTH STRATEGY

RE: DRAFT POLICY GS4: GREEN BELT

RE: DRAFT POLICY DM1: HOUSING ALLOCATIONS: SITES PN17, PN18, PN19, PN20 – PROPOSED ALLOCATIONS AT PANNAL

RE: OMISSION SITE – LAND TO THE SOUTH OF PANNAL

We act on behalf of Forward Investment LLP (‘FI’). FI own major land interests in Harrogate District including the former Dunlopillo site at Pannal (referenced in the Local Plan as Mixed-Use Allocation PN15 and EC1p) and the major strategic business park known as Flaxby Green Park (referenced as EC1q) amongst many other land holdings and interests. FI object to the above listed Policies of the draft Local Plan on the basis they are UNSOUND.

POLICY GS1

FI object to the Draft Policy GS1. Our Representation is that the proposed Policy is UNSOUND because: • Policy GS1 is ineffective and inconsistent with the Framework. It is ineffective because it fails to set out how the minimum housing requirement for the Plan Period will be met. No reference is made to the component parts of the proposed supply such as commitments, windfalls and allocations that the Council is relying on to deliver the minimum requirement. That information is buried in Appendix 1. The information at Appendix 1 is unclear and fails to set out the assumptions the Council is using to ensure the minimum requirement is delivered over the Plan Period.

Addison Planning Consultants Ltd

Registered Company Number: 08945769 VAT Registration: 186373672

• The information at Appendix 1 indicates that the Council considers its supply for the Plan period will be 16077 dwellings – set against a minimum requirement of 14,049 as set out in Policy GS1. That supply of 16077 appears to rely on 1455 dwellings through windfalls; all existing sites with Permission being delivered in full over the Plan Period; and all allocations being delivered in full over the Plan Period. It also assumes a significant contribution of 1080-dwellings from a new settlement, and 349 dwellings in the highly sensitive Crimple Valley (PN17 and PN19). • Policy GS1 will therefore be ineffective and contrary to the Framework because it fails to provide sufficient flexibility and choice; and fails to acknowledge that not all of the identified sites will come forward, to meet the minimum requirement. If for example, a new settlement cannot be delivered – reducing the supply by 1080 dwellings makes it highly unlikely that the Council has identified sufficient smaller and medium sized allocations to ensure delivery against the housing requirement. Similarly, a number of the proposed Allocations have significant constraints to delivery – and not all will be delivered. • FI are particularly concerned by the proposed Allocations PN17, PN18, PN19, PN20 – which are located in the highly sensitive Crimple Valley. These sites are one case in point – where significant constraints to delivery exist. • The list of proposed Allocations at DM1 form one component of the supply referenced in GS1 – and the proposed Allocation appears to place an over reliance on larger sites being delivered out in full by volume housebuilders; – and fails to consider the importance of identifying a significant range of smaller and medium sized sites to stimulate a resurgence in small and medium sized housebuilders.

Policy GS1 Providing New Homes and Jobs - needs to be expanded to clearly set out the assumptions on which the Council is relying to deliver the minimum housing requirement over the Plan Period. From the data buried in Appendix 1 – it appears the Council is being over optimistic about its delivery trajectory and assumptions that all commitments and allocations, and a sizeable part of a new settlement will be delivered in full.

Policy GS1 should also be amended to provide for greater flexibility and choice by referring to the role of small and medium sized Allocations as an essential component of the growth strategy to deliver the minimum housing requirement. This itself could do more to stimulate sustainable housing development in the District – rather than over reliance on a new settlement strategy that is fraught with difficulties. The Policy should be amended to clearly set out the approach to supply, and to introduce an emphasis on the need for smaller and medium sized allocations to stimulate choice and competition in the housing market, as well as provide a significant buffer to the minimum requirement. In short – more small and medium sized allocations are needed if the Council’s minimum housing requirement is to be realised.

POLICY GS2

FI object to Draft Policy GS2. The Policy ignores the unique locational characteristics of Pannal. Whilst Pannal is identified as a Primary Service Village – it is one of the few locations in the District focused around a main transport hub of Pannal Railway Station and with excellent transport connectivity between Leeds and Harrogate. Ignoring this unique locational characteristic is a fundamental flaw in the Growth Policy and makes the Policy ineffective.

2 | P a g e

a major new road to service the redevelopment of Site PN15. This infrastructure is in place and now uniquely located to accommodate additional growth.

POLICY GS4 FI objects to Policy GS4. The Council has failed to undertake even a selective review of the existing Green Belt boundaries in locations which are highly sustainable. The consequence of this policy approach is that proposed allocations have been pushed to less sustainable locations. The policy is UNSOUND because: • As no review of the Green Belt has been undertaken the Council has failed to establish an evidence base to test the sustainability credentials of competing sites. The policy is therefore ineffective, because it has resulted in sites (such as PN17 and PN19) being selected as Preferred Allocations whilst competing sites (as set out below) which are more sustainable (better located to transport infrastructure with less impact on landscape) have been ignored. • The Policy of maintaining the existing Green Belt boundary isn’t justified – because the Council has failed to assess whether any sites within the Green Belt and immediately adjacent to principal growth areas, still meet the purposes of Green Belt policy. The evidence set out below suggests that selective Green Belt release to the south of Pannal would have less impact on the purposes of the Green Belt than the Allocation of the sites identified by the Council.

POLICY DM1 FI are owners of proposed Mixed-Use Allocation PN15. Site PN15 (the former Dunlopillo site) is currently being redeveloped. Phase 1 (the Vida Grange care home) and main access road through the Green Belt has been completed. Phase 2, a residential development of 128 homes, has recently been sold to Bellway Homes; Reserved Matters permission has been granted and work is due to commence shortly on delivery of the 128 homes.

FI either owns outright or holds options over all the land (identified on the plan below as Sites F3A, F4, F5 and F3B) bordered by the A61, railway line, Buttersdyke Bar roundabout and the former Dunlopillo site.

FI objects to the identification of Sites PN17, PN18, PN19 and PN20 as proposed Allocations in the Draft Local Plan. Our Representation is that the proposed inclusion of these sites under Policy DM1 is UNSOUND because:

• Insufficient smaller and medium sized allocations have been identified around the key transport node of Pannal Station to provide flexibility and choice to meet the minimum housing requirement. • The identified supply for this Primary Service Village are located in the highly sensitive Crimple Valley and are unlikely to be deliverable. • There are other available sites in Pannal that are more sustainable than the sites proposed as Allocations by the Council. Sites F3A, F4, F5 and F3B are significantly more sustainable than the Council’s own proposals within the Crimple Valley; and • There are exceptional site-specific circumstances to justify allocating Green Belt land as part of the Local Plan process (without undertaking a comprehensive Green Belt Review).

This Representation sets out: • Details of a proposition to allocate land to the south of Pannal instead of land in the Crimple Valley and to protect the Crimple Valley from future development. • A summary of independent evidence that has been prepared to assess all of the development options in Pannal against landscape and Green Belt tests 3 | P a g e

• The exceptional circumstances to justify the allocation of Green Belt land in this case without undertaking a comprehensive Green Belt Review

THE PROPOSITION We are aware that the proposals to develop land owned by Harrogate Borough Council (PN19) in Crimple Valley are meeting with extremely stiff opposition from residents’ keen to retain the integrity of Crimple Valley and preserve the identity of Pannal as a village. The Council faces an extremely difficult challenge to deliver a lot of new houses over the next 20 years and Pannal, like a lot of other villages, will be expected to accommodate some of that growth. We consider that there is a potential scenario where the village can accommodate some growth whilst preserving the Crimple Valley. The FI proposition is:

• FI would purchase the land currently proposed within Crimple Valley from Harrogate Borough Council and gift this land to the community such that it could be afforded a protected status similar to that of the Stray and made accessible as a public open space.

4 | P a g e

• In exchange, development could be accommodated on the FI land to the south of the village to include necessary new infrastructure such as a new primary school and other such amenities as deemed appropriate.

ASSESSMENT OF THE OPTIONS FOR GROWTH IN PANNAL

FI has commissioned an independent assessment of the landscape implications of Harrogate Borough Council’s proposed development allocations at Pannal and the alternative FI proposition. This has been undertaken by LUC Ltd – specialists in undertaking Green Belt reviews, landscape impact assessment and providing expert evidence on the preparation of Development Plans to local planning authorities.

The LUC Report sets out the principles that underpin national green belt policy and applies those principles to the options for Pannal; and also assesses the landscape and visual effects of the two options. The full LUC report is included with these Representations, referenced as:

• Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal – LUC – 25-08-2017

LUC’s analysis indicates that the Crimple Valley, to the north of Pannal, performs a critical role in maintaining the separation, identity and local distinctiveness of Pannal and Harrogate. It concludes that the Crimple Valley is a distinctive and high-quality landscape, reflected in its designation as a Special Landscape Area. LUC’s conclusions are supported by Harrogate Borough Council’s own appraisal of site allocation which refers to the high landscape sensitivity of the Crimple Valley, its low landscape capacity to accommodate development and the limited opportunities to mitigate these impacts. It also notes the likely harm to the significance of heritage assets and the impact on local distinctiveness.

With regard to the FI proposals south of Pannal, LUC’s analysis indicates that the FI sites play a much weaker role in protecting the separation of the West Yorkshire conurbation from Pannal and Harrogate. The landscape is undesignated (in landscape terms) and makes a less significant contribution to the setting of Pannal. There is potential to include mitigation to create a good fit with the surrounding landscape and strong boundaries with adjacent areas.

FI proposals represent an alternative, rather than an addition to the sites being proposed by Harrogate Borough Council. As such, FI is proposing to purchase the Crimple Valley sites from HBC and gift the land to the community, in perpetuity. LUC’s preliminary drawings indicate how the valley could be enhanced as a local recreation resource.

With regard to the case for Green Belt release, the LUC report sets out that Harrogate Borough Council’s 2016 Green Belt Background Paper referred to the 2015 case of Calverton Parish Council vs Nottingham City Council Broxtowe, Borough Council and Gedling Borough Council, and a list of issues which help identify whether there are exceptional circumstances justifying alterations to the Green Belt boundary. Amongst the five matters identified is ‘the inherent constraints on supply/availability of land prima facie suitable for sustainable development’.

The Harrogate District Draft Local Plan: Sustainability Appraisal Addendum July 2017 confirms the importance of sustainability, and the role of the plan making and assessment processes in identifying the most sustainable sites required to deliver the Council’s growth strategy.

LUC’s assessment has concluded that, from a landscape and visual perspective, and in terms of maintaining local distinctiveness, identity and separation of Pannal and Harrogate, the option of

5 | P a g e

allocating land for development to the south of Pannal is significantly more sustainable than the Council’s own proposals within the Crimple Valley. With a mechanism in place to ensure the long-term retention of the special landscape between Pannal and Harrogate, the Forward Investments’ proposal to the south of Pannal is considered to be a more sustainable option which, carefully designed and implemented, could be accommodated with limited implications for the purposes of the green belt in this location.

THE BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSITION Further details of the potential for development within each of the FI sites F3A, F4, F5 and F3B are set out on an indicative masterplan layout include with this Representation and referenced as:

• 7039 SMR S044 Proposed Masterplan-A - 25-08-2017

Site F3A: Approx 10ha with indicative capacity of 191 dwellings plus a new three form entry primary school and 1.9 ha woodland discovery area.

Site F4: Approx 9.7 h for housing and landscape infrastructure. The number of dwellings/capacity to be the subject of review following further landscape mitigation work to determine the extent of developable area.

Site F5: Approx 5.1 ha for new employment development

Site F3B: Approx 2 ha for new employment development

The principle benefit of allocating all or some of these sites are that (for the reasons set out above) they are significantly more sustainable than the options identified by the Council at Sites PN17, PN18, PN19, PN20. The benefits of allocating sites F3A, F4, F5 and F3B for development include:

• Sites in the Crimple Valley will be protected from future development, preserving this important and valued landscape. • The Crimple Valley sites will be made available to the public and enhanced as a public open space with new footpaths, planting and enhancement of bio-diversity. • The provision of quality housing to meet identified housing needs to the south of Pannal. In this regard, the proposed allocations PN17 and PN19 indicate (as set out in the draft consultation) a combined capacity of 349 dwellings. Sites F3A and F4 could contribute a similar if not greater amount of new housing subject to appropriate landscape mitigation. Swapping PN17 and PN19 with F3A and F4 is therefore beneficial as they have the ability to deliver more quality housing. • The provision of affordable housing to meet locally identified needs. • The delivery by FI of a new three form entry primary school in Site F3 which will provide the capacity to resolve the existing infrastructure constraint to growth of the village. • The enhancement of local biodiversity through significant new planting and structural landscaping, including a dedicated woodland discovery area and the creation of new habitats. • Access to jobs in close proximity. This includes pedestrian access to the new highly skilled office jobs that will be delivered as part of the consented Phase 2. The approved plans make provision for a direct pedestrian connection between the employment zone in Phase 2 and the land within Site F3A. • Access to alternative modes of transport. This includes pedestrian access to Pannal train station and bus stops on the A61. As above, the approved plans for Phase 2 make provision for dedicated pedestrian and cycle access from Site F3 to these transport facilities.

6 | P a g e

• Sites F3 and F4 in particular have the potential to reinforce local distinctiveness through high quality design and layout given their location and proximity to the facilities, including new playing pitches and play area, within the consented Phase 2. • The sites are free from flooding constraints (unlike proposed site PN19).

In order to test the benefits of sites F3A, F4, F5 and F3B in comparison to the Council’s proposed sites, we have applied the Council’s own Sustainability Appraisal methodology to the proposed FI sites. This is included with this Representation as:

• Preliminary Sustainability Appraisal of Sites in Pannal - 25-08-2017

This shows that the proposed FI sites perform, on the whole, better against the Council’s own sustainable Appraisal criteria than the Council’s proposed Allocations. The above benefits, and the presented LUC evidence, represent significant beneficial exceptional circumstances to justify the allocation of Green Belt land in this particular case.

On the above basis Policy DM1 should be amended by: Deleting proposed Allocations PN17, PN18, PN19 and PN20 Allocating Sites F3A, F4, F5 and F3B for housing and employment development.

7 | P a g e

Kind Regards

JAY EVERETT MANAGING DIRECTOR ADDISON PLANNING CONSULTANTS LTD

8 | P a g e

Part B (please use a separate Part B form for each representation)

Mr Jay Everett/Addison Planning Consultants Ltd Name/Organisation:

3a. To which document does your response relate? (Please tick one)

Harrogate District Local Plan Publication Draft ✓ Habitat Regulations Assessment ☐

Sustainability Appraisal ☐ Equality Analysis Report ☐

3b. If you are making comments, to which part of the document do they relate? (Complete any that apply)

27 GS1 Page no. Paragraph no. Policy Ref.

Development Limit Site Ref. (put name of settlement) Policies Map

4. Do you consider the Plan is:

4.(1) Legally compliant Yes ☐ No ☐ 4.(2) Sound Yes ☐ No ☒

→ If you have selected No to Question 4.(2), please continue to Question 5 → In all other circumstances please go to Question 6

5. If you consider the Development Plan is UNSOUND, do you consider this to be because it is NOT: (tick all that apply)

Positively prepared ✓ Justified ☐ Effective ✓ Consistent with national policy ☐

What makes a Local Plan “sound”?

Positively prepared - the plan should be prepared in a way that meets the need for housing and other development, including infrastructure and business development.

Justified – the plan should be based on evidence, and be the most appropriate strategy for the district when considered against other reasonable alternatives.

Effective – the plan should be deliverable; the housing and other development should be capable of being carried out.

Consistent with national policy – the plan should enable sustainable development and be consistent with the policies in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

Please give details of why you consider the Harrogate District Local Plan to be not legally compliant or sound. Your reason(s) should concisely cover all the information, evidence and supporting information necessary to justify your comments, as there will not normally be another opportunity to make further representations after publication stage. After this stage, further submissions will only be at the request of the Inspector, based on the matters and issues she/he identifies for examination.

Representations must be received by 4.30pm on Friday 9 March 2018. Representations received after this time will not be considered duly made. 6. Please give reasons for you answer to 4(1), 4(2) and 5, where applicable. (You may also use this box if you wish to make representations on the Sustainability Appraisal, Habitat Regulations Assessment or Equality Analysis Report. You can attach additional information but please make sure it is securely attached and clearly referenced.)

PLEASE SEE COVERING LETTER BY APC LTD – DATED 08-03-2018

POLICY GS1

FI object to the Draft Policy GS1. Our Representation is that the proposed Policy is UNSOUND because:

• Policy GS1 is ineffective and inconsistent with the Framework. It is ineffective because it fails to set out how the minimum housing requirement for the Plan Period will be met. No reference is made to the component parts of the proposed supply such as commitments, windfalls and allocations that the Council is relying on to deliver the minimum requirement. That information is buried in Appendix 1. The information at Appendix 1 is unclear and fails to set out the assumptions the Council is using to ensure the minimum requirement is delivered over the Plan Period.

• Policy GS1 will therefore be ineffective and contrary to the Framework because it fails to provide sufficient flexibility and choice; and fails to acknowledge that not all of the identified sites will come forward, to meet the minimum requirement. If for example, a new settlement cannot be delivered – reducing the supply by 1080 dwellings makes it highly unlikely that the Council has identified sufficient smaller and medium sized allocations to ensure delivery against the housing requirement. Similarly, a number of the proposed Allocations have significant constraints to delivery – and not all will be delivered.

• FI are particularly concerned by the proposed Allocations PN17, PN18, PN19, PN20 – which are located in the highly sensitive Crimple Valley. These sites are one case in point – where significant constraints to delivery exist.

• The list of proposed Allocations at DM1 form one component of the supply referenced in GS1 – and the proposed Allocation appears to place an over reliance on larger sites being delivered out in full by volume housebuilders; – and fails to consider the importance of identifying a significant range of smaller and medium sized sites to stimulate a resurgence in small and medium sized housebuilders.

Representations must be received by 4.30pm on Friday 9 March 2018. Representations received after li\.1 ---l:l·jJI-- this time will not be considered duly made. 7. Please set out what change(s) you consider necessary to make the Harrogate District Local Plan legally compliant or sound, having regard to the test you have identified at question 5 where this relates to soundness. You will need to say why this change will make the plan legally compliant or sound. It will be helpful if you could put forward your suggested revised wording of any policy or text. Please be as precise as possible.

(If you are suggesting that the plan is legally compliant or sound please write N/A)

Representations must be received by 4.30pm on Friday 9 March 2018. Representations received after li\.1 ---l:l·jJI-- this time will not be considered duly made. 8. If your representation is seeking a change, do you consider it necessary to participate at the hearing sessions of the Public Examination? (tick one box only)

After this stage, further submissions will only be at the request of the Inspector, based on the matters and issues she/he identifies for examination.

No, I do not wish to participate at the Yes, I wish to appear  hearing session at the examination. I would at the examination like my representation to be dealt with by written representation

If you have selected No, your representation(s) will still be considered by the independent Planning Inspector by way of written representations.

9. If you wish to participate at the oral part of the examination, please outline why you consider this to be necessary:

The issues raised are complex and require debate.

Please note: the Inspector will determine the most appropriate procedure to adopt to hear those who have indicated that they wish to participate at the hearing session of the examination.

J EVERETT 8TH MARCH 2018 Signature Date

Please return the completed form by no later than 4.30pm on Friday 9 March 2018 to: Planning Policy Team, Harrogate Borough Council, PO Box 787, Harrogate, HG1 9RW or email: [email protected]

(Electronic copies of this form are available to download at www.harrogate.gov.uk/localplan )

Data Protection

The information you provide on the form will be stored on a database used solely in connection with the Local Plan. Representations will be available to view on the council’s website, but address, signature and contact details will not be included. However, as copies of representations must be made available for public inspection, they cannot be treated as confidential and will be available for inspection in full. Copies of all representations will also be provided to the Planning Inspectorate as part of the submission of the Harrogate District Local Plan.

Representations must be received by 4.30pm on Friday 9 March 2018. Representations received after this time will not be considered duly made. Part B (please use a separate Part B form for each representation)

Mr Jay Everett/Addison Planning Consultants Ltd Name/Organisation:

3a. To which document does your response relate? (Please tick one)

Harrogate District Local Plan Publication Draft ✓ Habitat Regulations Assessment ☐

Sustainability Appraisal ☐ Equality Analysis Report ☐

3b. If you are making comments, to which part of the document do they relate? (Complete any that apply)

30 GS2 Page no. Paragraph no. Policy Ref.

Development Limit Site Ref. (put name of settlement) Policies Map

4. Do you consider the Plan is:

4.(1) Legally compliant Yes ☐ No ☐ 4.(2) Sound Yes ☐ No ☒

→ If you have selected No to Question 4.(2), please continue to Question 5 → In all other circumstances please go to Question 6

5. If you consider the Development Plan is UNSOUND, do you consider this to be because it is NOT: (tick all that apply)

Positively prepared ✓ Justified ☐ Effective ✓ Consistent with national policy ☐

What makes a Local Plan “sound”?

Positively prepared - the plan should be prepared in a way that meets the need for housing and other development, including infrastructure and business development.

Justified – the plan should be based on evidence, and be the most appropriate strategy for the district when considered against other reasonable alternatives.

Effective – the plan should be deliverable; the housing and other development should be capable of being carried out.

Consistent with national policy – the plan should enable sustainable development and be consistent with the policies in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

PLEASE SEE COVERING LETTER BY APC LTD – DATED 08-03-2018

POLICY GS2

Representations must be received by 4.30pm on Friday 9 March 2018. Representations received after li\.1l:l ---·jJI-- this time will not be considered duly made. 7. Please set out what change(s) you consider necessary to make the Harrogate District Local Plan legally compliant or sound, having regard to the test you have identified at question 5 where this relates to soundness. You will need to say why this change will make the plan legally compliant or sound. It will be helpful if you could put forward your suggested revised wording of any policy or text. Please be as precise as possible.

(If you are suggesting that the plan is legally compliant or sound please write N/A)

Policy GS2 should be amended to set out the unique locational characteristics of Pannal; and look to direct growth towards the south of the village which is extremely well located to the existing transport infrastructure. The south of the village also benefits from new infrastructure, including a major new road to service the redevelopment of Site PN15. This infrastructure is in place and now uniquely located to accommodate additional growth.

Representations must be received by 4.30pm on Friday 9 March 2018. Representations received after li\.1l:l ---·jJI-- this time will not be considered duly made. 8. If your representation is seeking a change, do you consider it necessary to participate at the hearing sessions of the Public Examination? (tick one box only)

After this stage, further submissions will only be at the request of the Inspector, based on the matters and issues she/he identifies for examination.

No, I do not wish to participate at the Yes, I wish to appear  hearing session at the examination. I would at the examination like my representation to be dealt with by written representation

If you have selected No, your representation(s) will still be considered by the independent Planning Inspector by way of written representations.

9. If you wish to participate at the oral part of the examination, please outline why you consider this to be necessary:

The issues raised are complex and require debate.

Please note: the Inspector will determine the most appropriate procedure to adopt to hear those who have indicated that they wish to participate at the hearing session of the examination.

J EVERETT 8TH MARCH 2018 Signature Date

Please return the completed form by no later than 4.30pm on Friday 9 March 2018 to: Planning Policy Team, Harrogate Borough Council, PO Box 787, Harrogate, HG1 9RW or email: [email protected]

(Electronic copies of this form are available to download at www.harrogate.gov.uk/localplan )

Data Protection

Mr Jay Everett/Addison Planning Consultants Ltd Name/Organisation:

3a. To which document does your response relate? (Please tick one)

Harrogate District Local Plan Publication Draft ✓ Habitat Regulations Assessment ☐

Sustainability Appraisal ☐ Equality Analysis Report ☐

3b. If you are making comments, to which part of the document do they relate? (Complete any that apply)

36 GS4 Page no. Paragraph no. Policy Ref.

Development Limit Site Ref. (put name of settlement) Policies Map

4. Do you consider the Plan is:

4.(1) Legally compliant Yes ☐ No ☐ 4.(2) Sound Yes ☐ No ☒

→ If you have selected No to Question 4.(2), please continue to Question 5 → In all other circumstances please go to Question 6

5. If you consider the Development Plan is UNSOUND, do you consider this to be because it is NOT: (tick all that apply)

Positively prepared ✓ Justified ☐ Effective ✓ Consistent with national policy ☐

What makes a Local Plan “sound”?

Positively prepared - the plan should be prepared in a way that meets the need for housing and other development, including infrastructure and business development.

Justified – the plan should be based on evidence, and be the most appropriate strategy for the district when considered against other reasonable alternatives.

Effective – the plan should be deliverable; the housing and other development should be capable of being carried out.

Consistent with national policy – the plan should enable sustainable development and be consistent with the policies in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

PLEASE SEE COVERING LETTER BY APC LTD – DATED 08-03-2018

POLICY GS4

FI objects to Policy GS4. The Council has failed to undertake even a selective review of the existing Green Belt boundaries in locations which are highly sustainable. The consequence of this policy approach is that proposed allocations have been pushed to less sustainable locations. The policy is UNSOUND because:

• As no review of the Green Belt has been undertaken the Council has failed to establish an evidence base to test the sustainability credentials of competing sites. The policy is therefore ineffective, because it has resulted in sites (such as PN17 and PN19) being selected as Preferred Allocations whilst competing sites (as set out below) which are more sustainable (better located to transport infrastructure with less impact on landscape) have been ignored.

• The Policy of maintaining the existing Green Belt boundary isn’t justified – because the Council has failed to assess whether any sites within the Green Belt and immediately adjacent to principal growth areas, still meet the purposes of Green Belt policy. The evidence set out below suggests that selective Green Belt release to the south of Pannal would have less impact on the purposes of the Green Belt than the Allocation of the sites identified by the Council.

(If you are suggesting that the plan is legally compliant or sound please write N/A)

Undertake a selective Green Belt boundary review of the land around the south of Pannal/main transport hub for the south of the District.

After this stage, further submissions will only be at the request of the Inspector, based on the matters and issues she/he identifies for examination.

No, I do not wish to participate at the Yes, I wish to appear  hearing session at the examination. I would at the examination like my representation to be dealt with by written representation

If you have selected No, your representation(s) will still be considered by the independent Planning Inspector by way of written representations.

9. If you wish to participate at the oral part of the examination, please outline why you consider this to be necessary:

The issues raised are complex and require debate.

Please note: the Inspector will determine the most appropriate procedure to adopt to hear those who have indicated that they wish to participate at the hearing session of the examination.

J EVERETT 8TH MARCH 2018 Signature Date

Please return the completed form by no later than 4.30pm on Friday 9 March 2018 to: Planning Policy Team, Harrogate Borough Council, PO Box 787, Harrogate, HG1 9RW or email: [email protected]

(Electronic copies of this form are available to download at www.harrogate.gov.uk/localplan )

Data Protection

Representations must be received by 4.30pm on Friday 9 March 2018. Representations received after this time will not be considered duly made.

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal

Final Report Prepared by LUC August 2017

Project Title: Pannal, Harrogate Green Belt support

Client: Forward Investment LLP

Version Date Version Details Prepared by Checked by Approved by

V1 21.08.17 Draft J Whitworth- Nick James Nick James Allan Chris Cox

V2 24.08.17 Final J Whitworth- Nick James Nick James Allan

A4 Portrait Report Last saved: 24/08/2017 16:12

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal

Final Report Prepared by LUC August 2017

Planning & EIA LUC MANCHESTER Offices also in: Land Use Consultants Ltd Design Bristol Registered in England Registered number: 2549296 Landscape Planning Edinburgh Registered Office: Landscape Management Glasgow 43 Chalton Street Ecology Lancaster London NW1 1JD FS 566056 EMS 566057 LUC uses 100% recycled paper GIS & Visualisation London

Contents

Executive summary 1 Background and approach 1 Findings 1 Case for Green Belt release 1

1 Introduction 3 Project Brief 3 Structure of Report 3

2 Context 5 Location 5 Planning policy context 5 Landscape Designations 7 Existing Character Assessments 8 Natural Factors 10 Historical evolution of settlement 10 Key Views 12

3 Options appraisal 13 Description of development options 13 Green Belt methodology 13 Green Belt assessment 15 Landscape and Visual appraisal 25 Conclusions 34

4 Mitigation and enhancement opportunities 37 Landscape mitigation 37 Crimple Valley proposals 38

Tables Table 3.1 Summary of Green Belt assessment for Parcel PN17, Development Option 1 16 Table 3.2 Summary of Green Belt assessment for Parcel PN18, Development Option 1 17 Table 3.3 Summary of Green Belt assessment for Parcel PN19, Development Option 1 18 Table 3.4 Summary of Green Belt assessment for Parcel PN20, Development Option 1 19 Table 3.5 Summary of Green Belt Assessment for Parcel F3A, Development Option 2 20 Table 3.6 Summary of Green Belt assessment for Parcel F4, Development Option 2 21 Table 3.7 Summary of Green Belt assessment for Parcel F5, Development Option 2 22 Table 3.8 Summary of Green Belt assessment for Parcel 3B, Development Option 2 24 Table 3.9 Landscape and Visual appraisal of Parcel PN17, Development Option 1 26 Table 3.10 Landscape and Visual appraisal of Parcel PN18, Development Option 1 27 Table 3.11 Landscape and Visual appraisal of Parcel PN19, Development Option 1 28 Table 3.12 Landscape and Visual appraisal of Parcel PN20, Development Option 1 29 Table 3.13 Landscape and Visual appraisal of Parcel F3A, Development Option 2 30 Table 3.14 Landscape and Visual appraisal of Parcel F4, Development Option 2 31 Table 3.15 Landscape and Visual appraisal of Parcel F5, Development Option 2 32 Table 3.16 Landscape and Visual appraisal of Parcel F3B, Development Option 2 33 Table 3.17 Comparative Summary of Green Belt Assessment Findings for all parcels 34

Executive summary

Background and approach

LUC has been appointed by Forward Investment LLP to provide landscape and green belt advice in relation to the village of Pannal, which lies to the south of Harrogate in North Yorkshire. Specifically, this report sets out the results of an appraisal of the landscape implications of Harrogate Borough Council’s proposed development allocations at Pannal and the alternative being proposed by Forward Investments LLP. This appraisal makes reference to the principles that underpin national green belt policy, as set out in the National Planning Policy Framework. While it is recognised that the sites being proposed by Harrogate Borough Council lie outside the green belt, these principles are helpful in understanding their role in relation to Pannal and Harrogate. The assessment also compares the landscape and visual effects of the two options.

Findings

HBC allocations in the Crimple Valley LUC’s analysis indicates that the Crimple Valley, to the north of Pannal, performs a critical role in maintaining the separation, identity and local distinctiveness of Pannal and Harrogate. The Crimple Valley is a distinctive and high quality landscape, reflected in its designation as a Special Landscape Area. LUC’s conclusions are supported by Harrogate Borough Council’s own appraisal of site allocation which refers to the high landscape sensitivity of the Crimple Valley, its low landscape capacity to accommodate development and the limited opportunities to mitigate these impacts. It also notes the likely harm to the significance of heritage assets and the impact on local distinctiveness.

Forward Investments’ proposals south of Pannal LUC’s analysis indicates that land forming the Forward Investments’ proposal, to the south of Pannal, play a much weaker role in protecting the separation of the West Yorkshire conurbation from Pannal and Harrogate. The landscape is undesignated (in landscape terms) and makes a less significant contribution to the setting of Pannal. There is potential to include mitigation to create a good fit with the surrounding landscape and strong boundaries with adjacent areas.

Conservation and management of the Crimple Valley Forward Investments’ proposals represent an alternative, rather than an addition to the sites being proposed by Harrogate Borough Council. As such, Forward Investments is proposing to purchase the Crimple Valley sites from HBC and gift the land to the community, in perpetuity. LUC’s preliminary drawings indicate how the valley could be enhanced as a local recreation resource.

Case for Green Belt release

Harrogate Borough Council’s 2016 Green Belt Background Paper1 referred to the 2015 case of Calverton Parish Council vs Nottingham City Council Broxtowe, Borough Council and Gedling Borough Council, and a list of issues which help identify whether there are exceptional circumstances justifying alterations to the Green Belt boundary. Amongst the five matters

1 https://www.harrogate.gov.uk/.../2016_october_-_green_belt_background_paper.pdf

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 identified is ‘the inherent constraints on supply/availability of land prima facie suitable for sustainable development’. The Harrogate District Draft Local Plan: Sustainability Appraisal Addendum July 20172 confirms the importance of sustainability, and the role of the plan making and assessment processes in identifying the most sustainable sites required to deliver the Council’s growth strategy. LUC’s assessment has concluded that, from a landscape and visual perspective, and in terms of maintaining local distinctiveness, identity and separation of Pannal and Harrogate, the option of allocating land for development to the south of Pannal is significantly more sustainable than the Council’s own proposals within the Crimple Valley. With a mechanism in place to ensure the long term retention of the special landscape between Pannal and Harrogate, the Forward Investments’ proposal to the south of Pannal is considered to be a more sustainable option which, carefully designed and implemented, could be accommodated with limited implications for the purposes of the green belt in this location.

2 https://consult.harrogate.gov.uk/portal/pp/sa/sa17

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 1 Introduction

Project Brief

1.1 LUC has been appointed by Forward Investment LLP to provide landscape and green belt advice in relation to the village of Pannal, which lies to the south of Harrogate in North Yorkshire. 1.2 Forward Investment LLP has secured planning consent for the redevelopment of the former Dunlopillo site in Pannal. This phase of the scheme is largely outside the green belt, though it includes playing fields, the recently constructed access road and other green space which extends into the green belt boundary. Subsequent phases of the scheme extend to the south west, occupying the corridor of land between the A61 and railway line. Development here would include residential, commercial and employment uses, together with a new primary school and a dedicated ‘woodland discovery area’ for use by the school. This land is currently designated as green belt. 1.3 Harrogate Borough Council (HBC) has identified a number of locations for residential, employment and education development. Most of this land is located within the Crimple Valley to the north of the village, within the corridor of undeveloped land that separates Pannal from the town of Harrogate to the north. An additional draft housing allocation lies on rising ground to the west. 1.4 Forward Investment (FI) envisages their proposal as an alternative, rather than an addition, to the Council’s allocation within the Crimple Valley. As part of their proposal, they would also seek to purchase the HBC sites within the Crimple Valley and gift the land to the community, in perpetuity. 1.5 This report will consider the relative merits of the two development options from the perspective of green belt policy and their landscape and visual effects. For the purposes of this report, the HBC allocations are referred to as Development Option 1, and the FI sites are referred to as Development Option 2.

Structure of Report

1.6 The reminder of this report is structured as follows:  Chapter 2: Sets out the context with reference to national and local planning policy; landscape designations; existing character assessments; natural factors such as topography, hydrology and woodland cover, historic evolution of settlement and views.  Chapter 3: Describes the assessment approach used to review the Green Belt against NPFF purposes and sets out the findings of the Green Belt Assessment for the two development options outlined above.  Chapter 4: Describes the potential landscape and visual effects of the two development options outlined above.  Chapter 5: Outlines mitigation proposals to reduce impacts from development options, looking particularly at the Crimple Valley.

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 2 Context

2.1 This section of the report describes the location and context of Pannal, Harrogate and summarises current planning policies which are relevant to the study.

Location

2.2 The village of Pannal is located in the District of Harrogate, North Yorkshire, lying approximately 4km to the south of central Harrogate. Pannal lies on the northern edge of the West Yorkshire Green Belt, a planning designation designed to control the outward expansion of the cities of Leeds and Bradford. The green belt boundary follows the Leeds to York railway line to the east of the town and Crimple Beck to the west of the town. 2.3 Figure 1 shows the village in the context of nearby towns and cities, identifying the location of areas within green belt, key transport routes and Pannal train station along with Development Options 1 and 2.

Planning policy context

National Planning Policy 2.4 The current national planning policy for Protecting Green Belt land is set out in Section 9 of the NPPF. Paragraph 79 of the NPPF states that ‘the fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence’. 2.5 Paragraph 80 defines the five purposes of Green Belt as: 1. To check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas; 2. To prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another; 3. To assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment; 4. To preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and 5. To assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.

2.6 When considering any planning application, local planning authorities should ensure that substantial weight is given to any harm to the Green Belt. Para 89 of the NPPF states that ‘very special circumstances’ will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations. The construction of new buildings in the Green Belt is considered inappropriate, unless it falls into one of the exceptions categories listed in Paragraphs 89 and 90 of the NPPF. 2.7 Once Green Belts have been defined, the NPPF advocates enhancement to existing Green Belts. Paragraph 81 states that ‘local planning authorities are required to plan positively to enhance the beneficial use of the Green Belt’ once Green Belt boundaries have been defined including looking for opportunities to:  ‘Provide access;  Provide opportunities for outdoor sport and recreation;  Retain and enhance landscapes, visual amenity and biodiversity; or  Improve damaged and derelict land.’

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 2.8 The NPPF also requires local authorities to set out in their Local Plan a positive vision for the enhancement and enjoyment of heritage assets (DCLG, 2012). Part 12 Conserving and enhancing the historic environment clearly states that local authorities should recognise “the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness” and should seek “opportunities to draw on the contribution made by the historic environment to the character of a place”.

Planning Practice Guidance 2.9 Planning Practice Guidance was reviewed, catalogued and published on the internet by the government in 2014 (DCLG, 2014). The section on design includes guidance on promoting landscape character (Paragraph: 007Reference ID: 26-007-20140306). It states that “development should seek to promote character in townscape and landscape by responding to and reinforcing locally distinctive patterns of development” and that the “successful integration of new development with their surrounding context is an important design objective”.

Local Planning Policy 2.10 Harrogate’s Local Plan was adopted in 2001 with saved selective alterations made in 2004 and 2007. The council are currently preparing a new Local Plan which will set out the vision for the growth and development of Harrogate up to 2035. Consultation on selective parts of the new Local Plan commenced in 2015 and the new Local Plan is due to be adopted in Spring 2018. The Core Strategy, which was adopted in 2009, also sets out the strategic policies for development and conservation of the district up to 2021 (although this will be superseded by the new Local Plan). 2.11 Relevant policies to the Pannal area from the current Draft Local Plan include: Policy GS4: Green Belt 2.12 Inappropriate development in the Green Belt will not be approved except in very special circumstances in accordance with the national policy. Proposals for the beneficial use of the Green Belt are encouraged to retain and enhance the character of the district’s landscape, strengthen visual amenity and biodiversity, provide outdoor sport and recreation and to improve public access. Proposals must preserve the openness of the Green Belt and not conflict with existing land use. Policy HP2: Heritage Assets 2.13 Proposals affecting a conservation area need to protect and enhance where appropriate those elements that are identified as making a positive contribution to the character and special architectural and historical interest of the area. There is to be a strong understanding of the significance, character and setting of conservation areas and how this has informed proposals leading to high quality new design. Proposals are to be respectful of historical interest and local character. Policy HP3: Local Distinctiveness 2.14 Local distinctiveness should be protected and reinforced by high quality urban and landscape design. Development should recognise the contribution of the natural environment including biodiversity, landscape and green infrastructure. Policy NE3: Protecting the Natural Environment 2.15 Development should not result in any net loss of biodiversity and instead seek to strengthen this. Priority habitats and ecological networks are to be preserved, restored and recreated through development management. The restoration and re-creation of priority habitats and ecological networks identified in the Harrogate District Biodiversity Action Plan is to be encouraged as part of any development. Any development will have to show evidence of appraisal work that has demonstrated that significant harm resulting from the development can be avoided. This may be through relocation to an alternative site with less harmful impacts; the impacts can be adequately mitigated or as a last resort compensated for.

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 Policy NE4: Landscape Character 2.16 Proposals are to protect, enhance and restore the landscape character of Harrogate district for its own intrinsic beauty. Development has to maintain aesthetic and biodiversity quality of the natural and man-man heritage within the landscape. The Harrogate District Landscape Character Assessment identifies the character areas and development proposals should be informed by and sympathetic to this. 2.17 The impact of development proposals on Special Landscape Areas is to be carefully considered. This includes the Crimple Valley, a significant feature of Pannal. These Special Landscape Areas are valued locally for their high quality landscape and importance to the settings of Harrogate. Developments in these areas need to be linked to existing settlements and be designed to enhance the appearance of the urban edge and its integration with the countryside. Also development needs to avoid significant loss of the key characteristics that contribute to the quality of the Special Landscape Area. Policy NE5: Green Infrastructure 2.18 Development is to incorporate existing green infrastructure features within their design to improve accessibility to the surrounding area. It is also encouraged to capitalise on the opportunities to enhance or create green links between green infrastructure features. The character of the urban areas and their sense of place should be maintained and enhanced as manifest in the system of open spaces which link town and countryside. Policy NE7: Trees and Woodland 2.19 Development must not have an adverse impact on trees or woodland (including veteran or ancient) that have wildlife, landscape, historic, amenity, productive or cultural value. Development must also not result in the loss of trees or woodland that contributes to the character or setting of a settlement. Where adverse effects are unavoidable there must be compensatory provision made and is it encouraged that additional planting is considered in all new developments.

Landscape Designations

2.20 There are no statutory landscape designations in the Pannal area and surroundings. However, other statutory environmental designations include:  Rossett Local Nature Reserve (LNR) (ref.1475827), 1.78ha, approximately 1.7km from Development Option 1 and 2.4km from Development Option 2 in a north west direction.  Hookstone wood LNR (ref.1008964), 7.56ha, approximately 2.7km from Development Option 1 and 3.5km from Development Option 2 in a north east direction.  Birk Crag LNR (ref.1008784), 10.46ha, approximately 4.2km from Development Option 1 in a north west direction and located approximately 4.4km from Development Option 2 in a north east direction.  Great Almscliff Crag Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) (ref.1003704), 8.13ha, approximately 4.7km from Development Option 1 and 3km from Development Option 2 in a south west direction.  Birkham Wood SSSI (ref.1040423), 17.59 ha, approximately 5km from Development Option 1 and 6.4km from Development Option 2 in a north east direction. 2.21 Non-statutory Landscape Designations in the Pannal area and immediate vicinity include:  Rudding Park, a registered Grade II landscape on the Register of Parks and Gardens (ref. 1000403), 107ha, located approximately 2km from Development Option 1 and 3km from Development Option 2 in a north east direction.  Plumpton Rocks, a registered Grade II* landscape on the Register of Parks and Gardens (ref.1000535), 26.24 ha, located approximately 4km from Development Option 1 and 5.3km from Development Option 2 in a north east direction.

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017  Valley Gardens, a registered Grade II landscape on the Register of Parks and Gardens (ref.1001076), 22.92ha, located approximately 2.6km from Development Option 1 and 3.7km from Development Option 2 in a north west direction.  The Woods Ancient Woodland (ref.1103347) 4.2ha, ancient and semi-natural woodland, 9km from proposed development option 1 in a north-east direction and approximately 1.6km from proposed development option 2 in an eastern direction.  Parkins Wood Ancient Woodland (ref.1103510) 3.5ha, ancient and semi-natural woodland, approximately 2.3km from proposed development option 1 in a north-west direction and approximately 2.6km from proposed development option 2 in a western direction. 2.22 The above landscape designations are represented on Figure 2.

Existing Character Assessments

National Character Area 2.23 Existing character assessments have been reviewed to provide some context. The majority of Pannal falls within the southern-most part of National Character Area (NCA) 22 Pennine Dales Fringe, as defined by Natural England (Natural England, 2014). This NCA is broad but provides some context to the character of the study area. Key characteristics of this area which are of particular relevance to this assessment are:  Side slopes of Pennine Dales uplands, predominantly sloping down to the east, but with locally varied topography formed by several significant river valleys running from west to east;  A transitional landscape between the Pennine uplands to the west and the low-lying fertile landscape of the Vale of York to the east; mainly pastoral in the west, with rough grazing on the moorland edge, merging into mixed farming, with arable on the lighter soils in the east;  A well-wooded landscape, with woodland along valleys, many copses and plantations on the side slopes, and hedges with hedgerow trees in the lower lying arable areas;  Several historic parklands, with woodlands and veteran trees;  Field boundaries of drystone walls on higher ground and hedges in lower areas;  A generally tranquil and rural area, with a distinctly ancient character in some parts, linked by a network of minor roads;  Vernacular buildings predominantly built of Millstone Grit, mingling with Magnesian Limestone in the east, with roofs of stone flags, Welsh slate and some pantiles, creating strong visual unity to rural settlements and farmsteads;  Many rivers forming important landscape features along with their broad, glacially widened valleys. Smaller rivers flow through steep-sided valleys following courses cut by glacial meltwaters;  Historically rich area with many parklands, abbeys and historic buildings, well visited by adjacent urban populations, as well as medieval and Roman earthworks. 2.24 NCA 30 Southern Magnesian Limestone adjoins the eastern boundary of NCA 22 and is located in proximity to Pannal. Key characteristics of this area which are of particular relevance to this assessment are:  Fertile, intensively farmed arable land, with large fields bounded by clipped hawthorn hedges, creating a generally large-scale, open landscape;  Long views over lowlands to the east and west, and most prominent in the south.  Woodlands combining with open arable land to create a wooded farmland landscape in places, where traditionally coppiced woodlands support dormouse populations.

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 Local Character Assessment 2.25 At a local level, the Harrogate District Landscape Character assessment has identified 106 distinct character areas within the Harrogate district. Pannal, which is located in the south of Harrogate, is directly influenced by five character areas. Three of these encompass the Development Options. 2.26 Land parcel PN17 of Development Option 1 falls within Character Area (CA) 60 – Upper Crimple Valley. This is located to the north-west edge of Pannal. Key characteristics of this character area include:  Small scale V-shaped valley landform rising between 90m AOD in the valley bottom at Pannal to 220m AOD on the valley side near Briscoe Ridge Lane at the top of the south valley side;  The River Crimple or Crimple Beck is the main watercourse with several tributaries incising the valley sides.  Grade 3 agricultural land predominantly improved grass for livestock with a field pattern of early enclosure to the north and parliamentary enclosure to the south bound by hedges.  Few small blocks of deciduous woodland including Ancient Semi-Natural woodland at Low Wood. The disused quarry at Sandy bank is well-wooded and locally valued. Lots of trees along field boundaries, along the River Crimple and the urban edge of Harrogate.  There are several small hamlets including Beckwith, Brackenthwaite, Daw Cross and Shaw Green. In addition there are many scattered individual farmsteads and houses.  Traditional building materials are local sandstone with stone slate or blue slate.  Public footpaths and bridleways including the Harrogate Ringway create a network across the area and connect to (or are continuations of) those in Character Area 58. This area is easily accessible on foot from Harrogate and Pannal.  The area is within The Royal Forest of Knaresborough, a former medieval hunting park. 2.27 The majority of Development Option 1 falls within Character Area (CA) 58 – Middle Crimple Valley. This is a diverse, well wooded valley landscape abutting the urban edge of southern Harrogate. This character area is approximately 5km² and situated to the north and east of Pannal and also includes the River Crimple and Pannal Golf Course. Key characteristics of this character area include:  Gently undulating valley sides comprise rectilinear fields of improved grassland typical of parliamentary enclosure bound by an eclectic mix of hedges, walls and fences with individual trees;  Diverse land management with a highly manicured golf course in contrast with rectilinear grassland fields and woodland, including Ancient Semi-Natural woodland;  Recreational use in form of footpaths, bridleways and golf courses;  Historic and architectural interest including two railway viaducts. A network of public footpaths and bridleways and the Harrogate-Leeds railway line is a key feature crossing the Crimple Valley in this area with its Grade II* listed viaduct;  Little built form except for several scattered farmsteads although the area is heavily influenced by the surrounding urban edge of Harrogate and Pannal;  The Crimple Valley itself is important to the setting of Harrogate and provides an essential green ‘rural corridor’ separating Harrogate from the village of Pannal and others, highly valued by local residents. 2.28 Development Option 2 is located within CA 62 - Wharfe Valley Side Farmland. This is a relatively large scale area and constitutes approximately 22km² of farmland located to the southern edge of Pannal. Key characteristics of this character area include:  Simple and harmonious land use with medium-sized grassland fields bound by hedges and fences in places for horse and livestock control;  Gently rolling, hummocky landform with small becks heading south to the River Wharfe which drain this area;

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017  Little notable woodland except for medium sizes blocks of Riffa Wood (Ancient Semi-Natural) and Swindon Wood;  Built form and woodland blocks are relatively sparse allowing for extensive views yet little capacity to accept built development without detriment to character.

Natural Factors

Topography and Hydrology 2.29 The topography of the study area is shown in Figure 3. 2.30 The village of Pannal is situated in the Crimple Valley. Key landmarks that sit within the valley floor include St Robert’s Parish Church and Pannal Bridge, which are located 85m Above Ordnance Datum (AOD). The Leeds to York railway line is also situated within the valley bottom and is located to the south east of the historic core. Moving out of the valley, the land then rises to approximately 160m in a north western, south western and eastern direction, approximately 1- 1.5km from the historic core. This is relatively steep and visually defines the valley formation. 2.31 The River Crimple, also known as Crimple Beck, is approximately 20km long and flows north eastwards through Pannal within the valley floor. There are two smaller brooks that feed in to Pannal and these generally flow in an easterly direction. Clark Beck, which is a prominent tributary, passes through the Conservation Area in a south eastern direction and connects to Crimple Beck close to the grounds of St. Robert’s Parish Church. Horn Beck also meets Crimple Beck in the west of Pannal.

Woodland cover 2.32 There are dense blocks of woodland located within Pannal; along Church Lane at Sandy Bank, and between Crimple Meadows and Westminster Crescent. The numerous watercourses in the area also provide green corridors of riparian woodland, meandering through the village of Pannal. This is often dense and provides a strong sense of enclosure. Vegetation associated with Crimple Beck acts as a green visual barrier to the edge of Pannal, and helps to screen views through to the A61 which is a busy dual-carriageway. This woodland also serves to limit views between Pannal and Rossett Green, to the south of Harrogate, which strengthens a sense of separation. 2.33 The agricultural landscape is a mixture of rectilinear, irregular fields which are bounded by native hedgerows, stone walls and fences of varying materials. Hedgerow is the predominant field boundary, and this can be with or without hedgerow trees.

Historical evolution of settlement

Movement & Connectivity 2.34 Key transport links are illustrated on Figure 4. 2.35 The A61 is a single lane carriageway which runs close to Pannal, connecting Leeds to Harrogate. The historic core of Pannal is located to the west of the A61, with Pannal Golf Course and a recent residential development, known as Spacey Houses, located to the east. The high activity along the route is a barrier to pedestrian movement and the visual and audible presence of vehicles reduces tranquillity. There are key nodes along the A61 at a roundabout junction with the A658 to the south and at Station Road, which is a primary route into and through Pannal. 2.36 The Leeds to York railway line lies to the east of the historic settlement of Pannal and is also a barrier to movement. There are only two bridges across the train line, connecting the east of Pannal to the west, across Station Road and Burn Bridge Lane. Pannal Train Station is positioned in a central location off Station Road. Moving beyond Mill Lane to the north, Station Road becomes Main Street which is a key pedestrian and vehicular route through the village. Spring Lane connects Pannal with the adjoining settlement of Burn Bridge to the north west.

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 2.37 Within the peripheral rural landscape, roads are generally narrow, quiet and take on a country lane character. Yew Tree Lane, Hill Foot Lane and Burn Bridge Road are key examples. A lack of footpaths discourages pedestrian access into these rural areas. A network of Public Rights of Way (PRoW) compliments the primary and secondary routes within the settlement, across agricultural land.

Land Use 2.38 Within the rural landscape that surrounds Pannal, the prevalent land use in the area is agricultural. Fields are typically pasture. Due to the open nature of the landscape and lack of settlement, rural areas have a high degree of tranquillity and strong sense of remoteness, which contrasts with the activity within more densely populated areas. 2.39 Most generators of activity are focused along the A61, close to the junction with Station Road. Businesses comprise of two car showrooms, two petrol stations with additional amenities such as a cafe and suit hire facility, a car mechanics, garden centre and interiors shop and a local village shop incorporating a post office. To the west of the train line, there is a single Co-op shop located within the former train station. Pannal Business Park lies to the immediate east of the train line on Station Road, but appears vacant. 2.40 Educational uses include one primary school named Pannal Primary School which is located off Main Street. There are two churches: St. Robert’s Parish Church on Main Street and Pannal Methodist Church on Spring Lane. There are a number of recreational facilities including Pannal Golf Course, Pannal Cricket Ground, a playing fields and playground behind residential properties on Crimple Meadows and an open green space at Pannal Green.

Urban Structure and Built form 2.41 The settlement developed in a straggling linear form, with scattered stone cottages along Main Street, and a secondary cluster of buildings around Spring Lane and Church Lane. These three routes date from the medieval period. The cottages along the south side of Main Street are usually built gable end onto the road with the main elevations facing south. Later development, predominantly on the north side of Main Street are generally low lying bungalows with sympathetic stone cladding, facing onto the street. Front garden boundary walls, made from gritstone with ridge stone copings, provide a unifying element to the streetscape. 2.42 Late 19th century development along Mill Lane and the nearby Flaxton Terrace, which is located along Crimple Beck, heralds a change in the built form and pattern of development. Contrasting with the earlier cottages, these gritstone terraced properties are neatly aligned, with narrow proportions and minimal front garden space. Development in this area pertains to the location of mill buildings close to Crimple Beck. 2.43 By 1930, the first suburban developments of estates of semi-detached brick houses had appeared, covering the fields between Pannal Bridge and the train station. This suburban development continued after World War II, connecting the village with Burn Bridge and Daw Cross. Moving towards Burn Bridge, properties tend to be detached, of generous proportions with a rendered façade. Front gardens contribute positively to the street scene. 2.44 Late 20th century and 21st century housing is generally higher density with narrower gaps between buildings and smaller front gardens. Development is generally laid out along cul-de-sacs accessed from the primary and secondary routes within the study area. The building line is generally consistent within each street. The most recent housing development is located at Spacey Houses, which is accessed from Drury Lane. Properties here tend to be two storeys, detached and stone clad with relatively small gardens.

Heritage Assets and Conservation Areas 2.45 Pannal Conservation Area is located in the centre of Pannal and encompasses the extents of the Main Street and other landmarks including the Grade II* St. Robert’s Church, Grade II Pannal Hall and numerous other Grade II listed buildings and cottages. The extent of the Conservation Area is illustrated on Figure 4. 2.46 St Robert’s Church signals the historic core of the area, and forms a local landmark within the settlement. The Church has evidence of three distinct phases of building - the fourteenth century

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 chancel, built in the Decorated style; the fifteenth century west tower, in Perpendicular style, and the nave, which rebuilt in 1772 in characteristic Georgian style with round headed windows. These were replaced in 1888 by the present pointed Gothic windows with tracery. 2.47 Pannal Hall is located on Main Street, opposite St. Robert’s Parish Church, although the boundary is well wooded, with high stone walls, which limits views of the property. It is the largest secular building in the village and stands on the site of an older house which was demolished in 1860 when the present house was built. The house has two generous storeys built of coursed ashlar stone with quoins and a hipped roof with roof dormers and oversailing eaves. Windows are sliding sash with stone architraves. The front of the building has a projecting canopy supported by Tuscan columns.

Key Views

2.48 Pannal Conservation Area Appraisal identifies key views which relate to the historic settlement. These are considered to be:  St. Robert’s Parish Church: key views of the church can be experienced from the north and south along Main Street, and from Crimple Meadows and Clark Beck Close;  From Station Road, looking north over the village towards the encircling wooded ridge at Sandy Bank;  From Spring Lane on the top of this ridge, views further north over the landscape of rolling farmland with scattered farms; and  From the high point on Spring Lane looking back along Main Street taking in the rising land coming out of the valley. 2.49 The railway line is set within a false cutting with wooded embankments. Views of the railway line can be obtained from Station Road bridge, which lies immediately adjacent to Pannal Train Station. Views along the railway line from this location are channelled by vegetation and are directed along a north east - south west axis.

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 3 Options appraisal

3.1 This section of the report will consider the relative merits of two development options from the perspective of green belt policy, sustainable development and landscape and visual effects.

Description of development options

Development Option 1 3.2 Harrogate Borough Council (HBC) has identified, and is currently consulting on, a number of locations for residential, employment and education development to the north of the village, within the Crimple Valley. These proposed draft allocations are not located within Green Belt. These sites are identified on p.15 of the Draft Local Plan Additional Sites for Consultation (July 2017) and represented on Figures 1-4 and referenced as PN17-PN20.

Development Option 2 3.3 Forward Investment (FI) has secured consent for development on the site of a former Dunlopillo factory, which comprises three components: a care home (Phase 1 - built), residential (Phase 2a, currently being developed by Bellway) and mixed use (Phase 2b). With the exception of playing fields and the recently constructed access road, all this land lies outside the Green Belt. 3.4 FI own or hold options on land extending south between the A61 and the railway as far as the Buttersyke Roundabout. All of this land lies within the Green Belt. Development here has the potential to include residential, commercial and employment uses, together with a new primary school and a dedicated ‘woodland discovery area’ for use by the school. These sites are identified on Figures 1-4 and referenced as F3A, F3B, F4 and F5.

Green Belt methodology

3.5 The purpose of the assessment is to systematically evaluate the performance of the identified sites against the five nationally defined purposes, as set out in Paragraph 80 of the National Planning Policy Framework. Whilst the Development Option 1 allocations lie outside of the Green Belt designation, it is considered that the land between Harrogate and Pannal has a role in the resistance of greenfield expansion into urban areas. 3.6 The five priorities are:  To check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas.  To prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another.  To assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment.  To preserve the setting and special character of historic towns.  To assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. 3.7 Harrogate district incorporates parts of the West Yorkshire and York Green Belts which together cover 11% of the district. The Green Belt to the south of Harrogate and Knaresborough is the West Yorkshire Green Belt which surrounds the West Yorkshire metropolitan urban area and extends across the southern fringe of the district and into the narrow gap between Harrogate and Knaresborough. This Green Belt is extensive along the West Yorkshire and North Yorkshire border, in parts extending for around 12 miles from the northern edge of the City of Leeds authority

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 boundary. The established purposes of the West Yorkshire Green Belt as it relates to Harrogate district are to:  Check the growth of the West Yorkshire conurbation;  Protect the character of the towns of Harrogate and Knaresborough; and  Prevent the towns of Harrogate and Knaresborough from merging into one another. 3.8 The Green Belt between Harrogate and Knaresborough and along the southern boundary of the district was originally established by the West Riding County Development Plan: First Review (1966). With respect to the boundaries of the West Yorkshire Green Belt approved as part of the Harrogate and Knaresborough Local Plan, a significant amendment within the context of Pannal has been made to exclude the site of the former Pannal Auction Mart, now redeveloped for housing (Walton Park estate). 3.9 Neither the NPPF nor National Planning Practice Guidance provides guidance on how to undertake Green Belt reviews. A recent Planning Advisory Service (PAS) Advice Note1 and another produced by the Planning Officers Society (POS)2 provide useful discussion of some of the key issues associated with assessing Green Belt. 3.10 The PAS Guidance considers the way in which the five purposes of Green Belt should be addressed, as follows:  Purpose 1: To Check the Unrestricted Sprawl of large built up areas – this should consider the meaning of the term “sprawl‟ and how this has changed from the 1930s when Green Belt was conceived.  Purpose 2: To Prevent Neighbouring Towns from merging into one another - assessment of this purpose will be different in each case and a “scale rule‟ approach should be avoided. The identity of a settlement is not determined just by the distance to another settlement; instead the character of the place and the land between settlements must be acknowledged. Landscape Character Assessment is therefore a useful analytical tool to use in undertaking this purpose.  Purpose 3: To assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment - the most useful approach for this purpose is to look at the difference between the urban fringe and open countryside. As all Green Belt has a role in achieving this purpose, it is difficult to apply this purpose and distinguish the contribution of different areas.  Purpose 4: Preserving the Setting and Special Character of Historic Towns – this applies to very few places within the country and very few settlements in practice. In most towns, there are already more recent development between the historic core and the countryside.  Purpose 5: To assist in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land – the amount of land within urban areas that could be developed will already have been factored in before identifying Green Belt land. The value of various land parcels is unlikely to be distinguished by the application of this purpose. 3.11 It also states that the assessment of the performance of Green Belt should be restricted to the Green Belt purposes and not consider other planning considerations, such as landscape, which should be considered in their own right as part of the appraisal and identification of sustainable patterns of development. 3.12 The POS Guidance states that any review of the Green Belt should be taken in line with the aims of the NPPF with specific emphasis on the delivery of sustainable development and supportive infrastructure. Any land which is removed from the Green Belt for development will be in locations in which the case for sustainable development outweighs the assessment of this land in terms of the five Green Belt purposes. Sustainability of these areas will need to be addressed in terms of social (e.g. local open space provisions), economic (e.g. transport capacity) and environmental (e.g. impacts on biodiversity and efficient land use) considerations. 3.13 Table 3.1 in Appendix 1 summarises the criteria used to assess the relative performance of the Green Belt parcels and the ratings applied to each criterion. 3.14 For Green Belt Purposes 1-4, Table 3.1 sets out:

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 a) The NPPF Green Belt Purpose. b) The key issue(s) considered. c) The assessment criteria used. d) The ratings that were applied to each criterion, as follows:

Strong Parcel performs strongly against this Purpose.

Moderate Parcel performs moderately well.

Weak Parcel performs poorly.

No Contribution Parcel makes no contribution.

e) General comments on the assessment method. This provides further detail about how each criterion / rating was interpreted. This helped ensure consistency was achieved throughout the assessment of the land parcels. 3.15 Table 3.1 also includes a summary of the approach used in relation to Purpose 5. Purpose 5 focuses on assisting urban regeneration through the recycling of derelict and other urban land. This study does not include a parcel by parcel assessment of Purpose 5, as it is not possible to distinguish the extent to which each Green Belt parcels delivers against this purpose. 3.16 As each of the five purposes set out in the NPPF is considered to be equally important, no weighting or aggregation of scores across the purposes has been undertaken.

Green Belt assessment

3.17 The findings of the Green Belt assessment of Development Options 1 and 2 are summarised in the tables below:

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 Table 3.1 Summary of Green Belt assessment for Parcel PN17, Development Option 1

PN17 This parcel is located to the immediate north of residential development along Spring Lane. It is positioned to the north west of the historic core of Pannal, Description of defined as the Conservation Area extent, with Clark Beck forming a feature along Parcel its eastern boundary. It is bounded to the north and east by agricultural land, Spring Lane to the south and Yew Tree Lane to the west. The parcel lies on sloping land and is composed of two small sized pastoral fields with field boundary vegetation. There is no built development within the land parcel but Pannal Methodist Church and farm buildings are located immediately adjacent on Yew Tree Lane.

GB Purpose Assessment Rating

Purpose 1a: to This parcel lies adjacent to the northern edge of Pannal. There are Strong check the no urbanising features within the parcel. Adjoining built unrestricted sprawl development includes a small collection of agricultural buildings, a of large built up farmhouse, and a church. Ribbon residential development is areas – existing located along Spring Lane. The parcel is considered to play a sprawl strong role in preventing the urban sprawl of Pannal towards Rossett Green.

Purpose 1b: to This parcel lies adjacent to the northern edge of Pannal. There are Strong check the no strong barrier features along the urban edge to prevent urban unrestricted sprawl sprawl from occurring further north into existing agricultural land. of large built up Internal boundary features include field boundaries; these do not areas – potential play a strong role in preventing urban sprawl from taking place sprawl within the parcel. The parcel is bounded to the east by Clark Beck and associated vegetation along the watercourse.

Purpose 2: to The undeveloped green wedge between Pannal and urban Strong prevent settlement on the southern edge of Harrogate is relatively narrow neighbouring and varies from 300 – 600m in width. The parcel plays a critical towns from role in preventing the merging or erosion of the visual and merging into one physical gap between the two settlement areas. another

Purpose 3: to assist There is a sense of encroachment within the parcel due to the Moderate in safeguarding the ribbon residential development along Spring Lane which bounds countryside from the parcel to the south and a church and farm buildings located to encroachment the west. Although churches and farm buildings are considered appropriate development, there is a cumulative effect with nearby residential development. The parcel comprises sloping, pastoral fields bounded by hedgerows and hedgerows with trees. The land falls towards Crimple Beck and channels the view in that direction and to the rising agricultural land beyond. As a result, it retains a rural character.

Purpose 4: to Key views identified within the Pannal Conservation Area appraisal Strong preserve the indicate that the open countryside in this location plays a setting and special significant role in contributing to the setting or significance of the character of historic settlement. Field surveys have verified the contribution. historic towns

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 Table 3.2 Summary of Green Belt assessment for Parcel PN18, Development Option 1

PN18 This parcel is located to the immediate east of the A61 opposite Crimple Hall Garden Centre and to the immediate north of Merceded-Benz, Harrogate. It is Description of positioned to the north east of the settlement of Pannal. It is bounded to the Parcel north and east by agricultural land, to the south by the Leeds to York railway line and the A61 to the west. The parcel lies on gently undulating land and is composed of medium sized arable fields with field boundary vegetation. There is no built development within the land parcel itself.

GB Purpose Assessment Rating

Purpose 1a: to This parcel lies adjacent to the northern edge of Pannal. There are Strong check the no urbanising features within the parcel. Land cover consists of unrestricted sprawl arable farmland with hedgerows and hedgerow trees; it displays of large built up some sense of openness. However, the sense of openness is areas – existing reduced by the adjacent built development to the south (car sprawl showroom and petrol station) and the busy A61 which is located to the immediate west. The parcel is considered to be playing a strong role in preventing the urban sprawl of Pannal towards settlement at the south of Harrogate.

Purpose 1b: to This parcel lies adjacent to the northern edge of Pannal. There are Strong check the two strong and durable barrier features on the southern and unrestricted sprawl western boundaries; the railway line which connects Leeds to of large built up Harrogate and the A61 respectively. There are no strong barrier areas – potential features to prevent sprawl from occurring further north east into sprawl existing agricultural land. Internal boundary features include field boundaries; these do not play a strong role in preventing urban sprawl from taking place within the parcel.

Purpose 2: to The undeveloped green wedge which separates the settlement of Strong prevent Pannal from urban settlement south of Harrogate (in the vicinity neighbouring of Fulwith Road) is narrow and approximately 250m wide in this towns from location. The parcel plays an essential role in preventing the merging into one merging or erosion of the visual and physical gap between the two another settlement areas.

Purpose 3: to assist There is no urban development within the parcel. There is a sense Moderate in safeguarding the of encroachment due to the visual influence of the car showroom countryside from to the immediate south and the proximity of the A61 to the west. encroachment The parcel comprises undulating, arable fields bounded by hedgerows and hedgerows with trees. It displays characteristics of the countryside and retains a rural character.

Purpose 4: to Field surveys indicate that the parcel has no direct physical or Weak preserve the visual relationship with Pannal Conservation Area. The A61 and setting and special the associated vegetation both physically and visually separates character of the parcel from historic settlement. The openness of the land historic towns within the parcel contributes towards the wider setting of historic settlements, but does not from an integral part of their immediate setting.

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 Table 3.3 Summary of Green Belt assessment for Parcel PN19, Development Option 1

PN19 This parcel is positioned to the immediate north east of the historic core of Pannal. It is bounded to the north and east by agricultural land, to the south by Description of St Robert’s Parish Church and to west by agricultural land and residential Parcel development associated with Pannal Green. The parcel lies on gently sloping land, towards the Crimple Beck, and is composed of small to medium sized arable fields with field boundary vegetation. There is no built development within the land parcel itself.

GB Purpose Assessment Rating

Purpose 1a: to This parcel lies adjacent to the historic core of Pannal, defined as Strong check the the Conservation Area extent, immediately north of St Robert’s unrestricted sprawl Parish Church. There are no urbanising features within the parcel. of large built up Land cover consists of arable farmland with hedgerows and areas – existing hedgerow trees. It displays some sense of openness, although sprawl woodland associated with Crimple Beck provides a sense of enclosure. The sense of openness is also reduced by the proximity of residential development to the west and the A61 to the east. The parcel is considered to be playing a strong role in preventing the urban sprawl of Pannal towards settlement at the south of Harrogate.

Purpose 1b: to This parcel lies adjacent to the historic core of Pannal. The A61 Strong check the forms a strong and durable barrier feature along part of the unrestricted sprawl eastern boundary. There are no strong barrier features to prevent of large built up sprawl from occurring further north and west into existing areas – potential agricultural land. Internal boundary features include field sprawl boundaries; these do not play a strong role in preventing urban sprawl from taking place within the parcel.

Purpose 2: to The undeveloped green wedge which separates the settlement of Strong prevent Pannal from urban settlement south of Harrogate (in the vicinity neighbouring of Stone Rings Close and Stone Rings Grange) is narrow and towns from approximately 500m in this location. Development in this location merging into one would reduce this width to 250m. The parcel plays an essential another role in preventing the merging or erosion of the visual and physical gap between the two settlement areas.

Purpose 3: to assist There is no urban development within the parcel. There is a sense Moderate in safeguarding the of encroachment in some parts of the parcel due to the proximity countryside from of recent residential development on the southern boundary and encroachment 1960s residential development on part of the western boundary. The A61 lies immediately adjacent to the eastern boundary of the northern section of the land parcel and this contributes to an urbanising effect. The land to the west of Crimple Beck benefits from the screening that the waterside vegetation offers. Overall, the parcel has a relatively intact rural character and displays moderate characteristics of the open countryside.

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 Purpose 4: to Field surveys indicate that the parcel has a direct physical and Strong preserve the visual relationship with Pannal Conservation Area, along its setting and special southern boundary. Views of St Robert’s Parish Church are character of unobstructed in the southern section of the parcel, and the land historic towns forms a backdrop to the church. The openness of the land within the parcel contributes towards the wider setting of historic settlements, but does not from an integral part of their immediate setting.

Table 3.4 Summary of Green Belt assessment for Parcel PN20, Development Option 1

PN20 This parcel is positioned to the north of the historic core of Pannal. It is bounded to the north and east by agricultural land, to the south by residential Description of development associated with Pannal Green and to the west by Pannal Primary Parcel School. The parcel lies on relatively flat land and is composed of one small agricultural field with field boundary vegetation. There is no built development within the land parcel itself.

GB Purpose Assessment Rating

Purpose 1a: to This parcel lies approx. 150m north of the historic core of Pannal, Moderate check the defined as the Conservation Area extent, immediately north of a unrestricted sprawl 1960s housing development. There are no urbanising features of large built up within the parcel. Land cover consists of arable farmland with areas – existing hedgerows and hedgerow trees. Due to the size of the land sprawl parcel, it is considered to play a moderate role in preventing the urban sprawl of Pannal towards settlement at the south of Harrogate.

Purpose 1b: to This parcel lies adjacent to the historic core of Pannal. There are Strong check the no strong barrier features to prevent sprawl from occurring further unrestricted sprawl north and east into existing agricultural land. Internal boundary of large built up features include field boundaries; these do not play a strong role areas – potential in preventing urban sprawl from taking place within the parcel. sprawl

Purpose 2: to The undeveloped green wedge which separates the settlement of Moderate prevent Pannal from urban settlement south of Harrogate (in the vicinity neighbouring of Stone Rings Close and Stone Rings Grange) is narrow and towns from approximately 500m in this location. Although the parcel plays a merging into one role in preventing the merging or erosion of the visual and another physical gap between the two settlement areas, due to the small scale of the area, it is considered that the reduction in the width would not be readily perceived.

Purpose 3: to assist There is no urban development within the parcel. There is a sense Moderate in safeguarding the of encroachment in some parts of the parcel due to the proximity countryside from of 1960s residential development on the southern boundary. The encroachment land to the east benefits from the screening that the waterside vegetation associated with Crimple Beck offers. Overall, the parcel has a relatively intact rural character and displays moderate characteristics of the open countryside.

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 Purpose 4: to Field surveys indicate that the parcel has an indirect visual Weak preserve the relationship with Pannal Conservation Area, from parts of its setting and special eastern boundary. The openness of the land within the parcel character of contributes towards the wider setting of historic settlements, but historic towns does not from an integral part of their immediate setting.

Table 3.5 Summary of Green Belt Assessment for Parcel F3A, Development Option 2

PARCEL F3A This parcel is located within Green Belt to the immediate west and south of the former Dunlopillo factory, which is soon to be re-developed for housing. It is Description of positioned to the south of the historic core of Pannal, separated by the Leeds to Parcel York railway line and pastoral agricultural land beyond. It is bounded to the south-east by the A61, and the new access route (Thirkill Drive), and to the east (beyond the A61) by agricultural land. The parcel lies on rising land and is composed of small to moderately sized pastoral fields with field boundary vegetation. There is no built development.

GB Purpose Assessment Rating

Purpose 1a: to The parcel lies adjacent to the site of the former Dunlopillo factory Moderate check the (soon to be re-developed for housing). Other than the access road unrestricted sprawl into the site, there are no existing urbanising features within the of large built up parcel itself. Land cover consists of pastoral farmland with areas – existing hedgerows and hedgerow trees. It displays some sense of sprawl openness, however, the topography within the parcel directs the view towards the adjacent urban edge which is widely visible from within the parcel.

Purpose 1b: to The parcel lies adjacent to the site of the former Dunlopillo Moderate check the factory. There is one strong and durable barrier feature on the unrestricted sprawl north western boundary - the railway line connecting Leeds to of large built up Harrogate. This feature forms the boundary of the Green Belt areas – potential itself. Internal boundary features include field boundaries and a sprawl stone retaining wall adjacent the A61; these do not play a strong role in preventing urban sprawl from taking place within the parcel. The presence of the A61 along the south eastern boundary of the land parcel allows for greater opportunities for urban sprawl to occur due to the potential for ribbon development and the wider access it provides.

Purpose 2: to The southern edge of Pannal is approximately 12km from Weak prevent settlement located along the northern edge of Leeds. Therefore, neighbouring whilst the parcel has a role in preventing physical coalescence, towns from due to the topography and the presence of a ridge line along the merging into one western boundary, the loss of openness would not be perceived as another reducing the gap between settlements.

Purpose 3: to assist There is a limited sense of urban encroachment within the parcel Moderate in safeguarding the as a result of the adjacent former factory (to be redeveloped for countryside from housing), a new care home development and a number of houses encroachment located along A61. However, the parcel still displays some of the characteristics of the countryside despite these urbanising influences. Neighbouring urban development has a visual influence on the rural character of the parcel.

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 Purpose 4: to Field surveys indicate that the parcel has no direct physical or Weak preserve the visual relationship with historic settlement, defined as Pannal setting and special Conservation Area, and does not play a role in its immediate character of setting or significance. This is largely due to visual screening historic towns provided by built development and trees, and the physical separation offered by the railway embankment and associated vegetation. The openness of the land within the parcel contributes towards the wider setting.

Table 3.6 Summary of Green Belt assessment for Parcel F4, Development Option 2

PARCEL F4 This parcel is located within Green Belt to the south-west of the former Description of Dunlopillo factory, which is soon to be re-developed for housing. It is positioned Parcel to the south of the historic core of Pannal, separated by the Leeds to York railway line and pastoral agricultural land beyond. It is bounded to the south- east by the A61, to the east by agricultural land and to the south-west by Burn Bridge Lane and Butterskye Bridge. The parcel lies on rising land and is composed of small to moderately sized pastoral fields with field boundary vegetation. There is no built development.

GB Purpose Assessment Rating

Purpose 1a: to The parcel lies approx. 300m from the former Dunlopillo factory, Moderate check the which is soon to be re-developed for housing. This is currently the unrestricted sprawl closest urbanising feature. There are no existing urbanising of large built up features within the parcel itself. Land cover consists of pastoral areas – existing farmland with hedgerows and hedgerows trees. It displays a sprawl strong sense of openness. A ridgeline cuts through the site in a westerly direction, which directs the view away from the urban edge of Pannal.

Purpose 1b: to The parcel lies approx. 300m from the former Dunlopillo factory in Moderate check the a south westerly direction. There is one strong and durable barrier unrestricted sprawl feature on the north western boundary - the railway line of large built up connecting Leeds to Harrogate. This feature forms the boundary of areas – potential the Green Belt itself. Internal boundary features include field sprawl boundaries, a stone retaining wall adjacent the A61 and a PROW; these do not play a strong role in preventing urban sprawl from taking place within the parcel. The presence of the A61 along the south eastern boundary of the land parcel allows for greater opportunities for urban sprawl to occur due to the potential for ribbon development and the wider access it provides.

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 Purpose 2: to The southern edge of Pannal is approximately 12km from Weak prevent settlement located along the northern edge of Leeds. Therefore, neighbouring whilst the parcel has a role in preventing physical coalescence, towns from due to the topography, the loss of openness would not be merging into one perceived as reducing the gap between settlements. another

Purpose 3: to assist There is a limited sense of urban encroachment within the parcel. Moderate in safeguarding the Neighbouring urban development, which constitutes a former countryside from factory (to be redeveloped for housing), a new care home encroachment development and a number of houses located along A61, has limited visual influence on the rural character of the parcel due to topography. The proximity of the A61 and the lighting located at the junction with Burn Bridge Road compromises openness. However, the parcel continues to contain some of the characteristics of the countryside.

Purpose 4: to Field surveys indicate that the parcel has no direct physical or Weak preserve the visual relationship with nearby historic settlement, defined as setting and special Pannal Conservation Area, and does not play a role in its setting character of or significance. The openness of the land within the parcel historic towns contributes towards the wider setting of historic settlements, but does not from an integral part of their immediate setting.

Table 3.7 Summary of Green Belt assessment for Parcel F5, Development Option 2

PARCEL F5 This parcel is located within Green Belt to the south of the historic core of Description of Pannal. It is bounded to the north by Burn Bridge Lane and Butterskye Bridge; to Parcel the east by the A61; to the south by agricultural land and to the west by the Leeds to York railway line. The parcel lies on relatively flat land and is comprises part of one moderately sized pastoral field with field boundary vegetation. There is no built development.

GB Purpose Assessment Rating

Purpose 1a: to The parcel lies to the south of Pannal, approx. 650m from the Moderate check the former Dunlopillo factory, and is surrounded by agricultural land. unrestricted sprawl Whilst the parcel is not currently bounded by a large built up area, of large built up it is assumed that the parcel is unlikely to be developed without areas – existing development occurring in parcels F3A and F4. There are no sprawl existing urbanising features within the parcel itself. Land cover consists of pastoral farmland with boundary hedgerows with trees and scrubby vegetation along the railway embankment. It displays a strong sense of openness. The urban edge of Pannal is not clearly defined due to topography, tree cover and distance.

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 Purpose 1b: to The parcel lies to the south of Pannal, approx. 650m from the Moderate check the former Dunlopillo factory. There is one strong and durable barrier unrestricted sprawl feature on the western boundary; the railway line which connects of large built up Leeds to Harrogate. This feature forms the boundary of the Green areas – potential Belt itself. There are no internal boundary features within the land sprawl parcel. The presence of the A61 along the eastern boundary of the land parcel, and the nearby A658, allows for greater opportunities for urban sprawl to occur due to the potential for ribbon development and the wider access it provides. This is heightened due to the proximity of the Butterskye Roundabout and the potential for sprawl radiating from this location.

Purpose 2: to The southern edge of Pannal is approximately 12km from Weak prevent settlement located along the northern edge of Leeds. Therefore, neighbouring whilst the parcel has a role in preventing physical coalescence, towns from due to the topography, the loss of openness would not be merging into one perceived as reducing the gap between settlements. another

Purpose 3: to assist There is a limited sense of urban encroachment within the parcel. Moderate in safeguarding the Nearby urban development, which constitutes a former factory (to countryside from be redeveloped for housing), a new care home development and a encroachment number of houses located along A61, has limited visual influence on the rural character of the parcel due to topography. However, the proximity of the A61 and A658, the lighting which stretches from the junction with Burn Bridge Road to the Butterskye roundabout and the relative flatness of the topography across the land parcel compromises the sense of openness.

Purpose 4: to Field surveys indicate that the parcel has no direct physical or No preserve the visual relationship with nearby historic settlement, defined as contribution setting and special Pannal Conservation Area, and does not play a role in their setting character of or significance. This is largely due to the lie of the land. historic towns

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 Table 3.8 Summary of Green Belt assessment for Parcel 3B, Development Option 2

PARCEL F3B This parcel is located within Green Belt to the south of the historic core of Pannal. Description of It is bounded to the north by agricultural land; to the east by the A61; to the Parcel south by the A658 land and to the west by the Leeds to York railway line and agricultural land. The parcel lies on relatively flat land and is comprised of part of one moderately sized pastoral field with field boundary vegetation. There is no built development.

GB Purpose Assessment Rating

Purpose 1a: to The parcel lies to the south of Pannal, approx. 900m from the Moderate check the former Dunlopillo factory, and is surrounded by agricultural land. unrestricted There are no existing urbanising features within the parcel itself. sprawl of large Whilst the parcel is not currently bounded by a large built up area, it built up areas – is assumed that the parcel is unlikely to be developed without existing sprawl development occurring in parcels F3A and F4. Land cover consists of pastoral farmland with hedgerows and hedgerows with trees. It displays a strong sense of openness. The urban edge of Pannal is not clearly defined due to topography, tree cover and distance.

Purpose 1b: to The parcel lies to the south of Pannal, approx. 900m from the Moderate check the former Dunlopillo factory. There is one strong and durable barrier unrestricted feature on the western boundary; the railway line which connects sprawl of large Leeds to Harrogate. This feature forms the boundary of the Green built up areas – Belt itself. Internal boundary features comprise a loose-laid stone potential sprawl retaining wall. The presence of the A61 along the eastern boundary of the land parcel, and the nearby A658, allows for greater opportunities for urban sprawl to occur due to the potential for ribbon development and the wider access it provides. This is heightened due to the proximity of the Butterskye Roundabout and the potential for sprawl radiating from this location.

Purpose 2: to The southern edge of Pannal is approximately 12km from Weak prevent settlements along the northern edge of Leeds. Therefore, whilst the neighbouring parcel therefore has a role in preventing physical coalescence, due towns from to the topography, the loss of openness would not be perceived as merging into one reducing the gap between settlements. another

Purpose 3: to There is a limited sense of urban encroachment within the parcel. Moderate assist in Nearby urban development, which constitutes a former factory (to safeguarding the be redeveloped for housing), a new care home development and a countryside from number of houses located along A61, has limited visual influence on encroachment the rural character of the parcel due to topography. However, the proximity of the A61 and A658, the lighting which stretches from the junction with Burn Bridge Road to the Butterskye roundabout and the relative flatness of the topography across the land parcel compromises the sense of openness.

Purpose 4: to Field surveys indicate that the parcel has no direct physical or visual No preserve the relationship with nearby historic settlement, defined as Pannal contribution setting and Conservation Area, and does not play a role in their setting or special character significance. This is largely due to the lie of the land, and the of historic towns distance from Pannal.

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 Landscape and Visual appraisal

3.18 The purpose of this section of the report is to make an appraisal of the local landscape and townscape in and around the proposal site to ascertain the contribution of the development options to the local townscape and inform future development proposals. 3.19 The appraisal has been produced in accordance with the Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (GLVIA), 3rd Edition, produced by the Landscape Institute and the Institute for Environmental Management and Assessment. This is widely considered to be the industry standard on the subject. 3.20 To determine the value of the landscape, it is appropriate to examine the role of the site and its immediate context in terms of the range of local factors set out in GLVIA3 (Box 5.1, page 84). 3.21 A site walk-over was conducted in sunny conditions in August 2017 by a Chartered Landscape Architect and landscape professional. 3.22 The findings of the Landscape and Visual appraisal of Development Options 1 and 2 are summarised in the tables below:

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 Table 3.9 Landscape and Visual appraisal of Parcel PN17, Development Option 1

Illustrative viewpoint Looking east across land parcel

Local LCA Area 60 – Upper Crimple Valley

Topography & views The north western corner of the site sits at 120m AOD. The land then falls steadily to lie at approx. 100m AOD along the eastern boundary of the parcel, close to Clark Beck. The parcel sits within a valley bottom with land rising to the north, east and west, culminating in a natural amphitheatre effect. Views of the parcel, set within the landscape, can be obtained from Spring Lane, Church Lane and Yew Tree Lane.

Landscape qualities  The land parcel lies within Crimple Valley Special Landscape Area. The area plays a positive role in maintaining the separation and identity of Pannal and Harrogate.  Clark Beck is a landscape feature located to the immediate east of the parcel. The watercourse is a heritage asset as it played a role in the settlement pattern of the village. Vegetation associated along the beck is likely to have a biodiversity value.  The site comprises pastoral fields enclosed by mature native hedgerow with occasional hedgerow trees.  Spring Lane is characterised by large semi-detached properties with generous front gardens, set back from the road by a grass verge which has a greening effect on the streetscape. The character of the road is in-keeping with a country lane, with no pedestrian footpaths.  Pannal Conservation Area is located approx. 110m to the east.  Pannal Methodist Church is a local landmark and focal point along Spring Lane and at the junction with Yew Tree Lane and Burn Bridge Road. The red brick façade contrasts with the vernacular of the surrounding built form.

Visual analysis  High sensitivity residential receptors are located along Spring Lane which forms the immediate southern boundary of the land parcel and Yew Tree Lane to the immediate west. Direct views from the upper floors of the front of the properties would be obtainable.  Other high sensitivity views are located to the immediate west from Spring Lane Farm, and users of Pannal Methodist Church. Both of these properties adjoin the land parcel.  Long distance views from highly sensitive residential receptors are possible along Church Lane and Rossett Green Lane.  The parcel is visible from the Key View outlined within the Pannal Conservation Area Appraisal document, and development would likely alter the setting.

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 Table 3.10 Landscape and Visual appraisal of Parcel PN18, Development Option 1

Illustrative viewpoint Looking south east across the land, from within land parcel

Local LCA Area 58 Middle Crimple Valley

Topography & views The north of the land parcel lies at approx. 80m AOD. The landform then gently undulates to 90m AOD along the southern boundary of the site adjacent to Mercedes-Benz Harrogate. The parcel sits within a valley bottom, with land rising to the north, north west and south east. Woodland to the immediate north, east and south east limits views into the parcel. Long range views can be obtained from the A61 of the Grade II* listed viaduct (Leeds to York railway line) across the open landscape.

Landscape qualities  The land parcel lies within Crimple Valley Special Landscape Area. The area plays a positive role in maintaining the separation and identity of Pannal and Harrogate.  Crimple Beck is a landscape feature which runs along the northern boundary of the parcel. The watercourse is a heritage asset as it played a role in the settlement pattern of the village. Vegetation associated along the beck is likely to have a biodiversity value.  The site comprises arable fields, with rectilinear field pattern defined by mature native hedgerows with occasional trees.  The low-lying landscape contributes to the setting to the Grade II* listed viaduct, located to the north east of the land parcel.  The busy A61, which abuts the parcel on the west, is a physical barrier to pedestrian movement. Vegetation along the route does little to screen or soften this transport feature.  There is a PRoW within the land parcel, situated close to the northern and eastern boundaries.

Visual analysis  High sensitivity PRoW users would have immediate views of development.  Medium sensitivity views are possible from users of Pannal Golf Course and the Club House (300m from parcel) on Follifoot Road.  There would be low sensitivity views from commercial receptors at Crimple Hall Garden Centre on the A61 and transport receptors using the A61 and Leeds to York railway line. Whilst these receptors are low sensitivity, the immediacy of the view has the potential to increase the significance.  Long range views can be obtained from the A61 of the Grade II* listed viaduct (Leeds to York railway line) across the open landscape.

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 Table 3.11 Landscape and Visual appraisal of Parcel PN19, Development Option 1

Illustrative viewpoint Looking north across land parcel

Local LCA Area 58 Middle Crimple Valley

Topography & views The eastern and western extents of the parcel lie at approx. 90m AOD, falling to approx. 80m AOD along Crimple Beck which runs in a south west to north east direction. The land parcel is dissected by the beck. The parcel sits within a valley bottom with land rising to the north and west. A dense block of woodland at Sandy Bank limits views from the west. Woodland belts along Crimple Beck and Stone Rings Beck to the north offer enclosure. Built development to the south west contains most views from Main Street. However, gaps in development, which provides the setting to St Robert’s Church, opens up some views.

Landscape qualities  The land parcel lies within Crimple Valley Special Landscape Area. The area plays a positive role in maintaining the separation and identity of Pannal and Harrogate.  Crimple Beck is a landscape feature which meanders through the parcel. The watercourse is a heritage asset as it played a role in the settlement pattern of the village. Vegetation associated along the beck is likely to have a biodiversity value.  The site comprises arable fields, with rectilinear field pattern enclosed by mature native hedgerows with occasional hedgerow trees. Furthermore, there are a number of trees located within the fields.  The southern-most area of the parcel contributes to the setting of St. Robert’s Church, which is a local landmark and Grade II* listed building.  The beck is a physical boundary which dissects the land parcel. Vegetation along the beck screens views of the A61 from western part of the parcel.  There is a PRoW within the land parcel, situated to the west of Crimple Beck.

Visual analysis  High sensitivity residential receptors with direct views from front of properties along Clark Beck Close and Pannal Court.  High sensitivity PROW users would have immediate views of development.  Other high sensitivity views are located to the immediate south from users of St Robert’s Church. The church adjoins the land parcel.  Medium sensitivity educational receptors from Pannal Primary School would have immediate views, potentially from classrooms.  There would be low sensitivity views from commercial receptors at Crimple Hall Garden Centre on the A61 and transport receptors using the A61. Whilst these receptors are low sensitivity, the immediacy of the view has the potential to increase the significance.

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 Table 3.12 Landscape and Visual appraisal of Parcel PN20, Development Option 1

Illustrative viewpoint Looking west across land parcel

Local LCA Area 58 Middle Crimple Valley

Topography & views The land parcel lies between 80 and 90m AOD with the land rising in north westerly direction. A dense block of woodland at Sandy Bank limits views from the immediate west. Woodland belts along Stone Rings Beck to the north and Crimple Beck to the east offers strong enclosure. Built development to the south contains views through from Main Street.

Visual analysis  High sensitivity residential receptors with direct views from front of properties along Clark Beck Close and Pannal Court.  High sensitivity PROW users in the adjacent field (PN19) would have close range views of development.  Other high sensitivity views are located to the immediate south from users of St Robert’s Church.  Medium sensitivity educational receptors from Pannal Primary School would have immediate views, potentially from classrooms.  There would be low sensitivity views from commercial receptors at Crimple Hall Garden Centre on the A61. Views would be screened by vegetation associated with Crimple Beck, although winter views may be possible.

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 Table 3.13 Landscape and Visual appraisal of Parcel F3A, Development Option 2

Illustrative viewpoint Looking west across land parcel

Local LCA Area 62 – Wharfe Valley Side Farmland

Topography & views The land parcel is situated on rising land; the lowest point is in the north west corner and lies between 90 – 100m AOD, whilst the highest point lies in the south east of the parcel at approx. 120m AOD. A ridgeline cuts across the southern section of the parcel which serves to limit views from the south and east. Field boundaries at lower levels within the parcel provide a sense of enclosure, although feelings of openness increase in areas close to the A61 adjacent to the newly constructed roundabout and link road.

Landscape qualities  The land parcel is not currently subject to any designations for reasons of landscape value.  The parcel comprises pastoral fields enclosed by mature native hedgerows with occasional trees. Timber post and rail fencing forms the majority of the boundary along the A61 and new link road. New planting has been installed outside of the fence line which will take some time to mature.  The landscape can feel relatively open and forms part of the rural agricultural setting of Pannal.  The landform in south east of the land parcel is positioned at a higher level than the adjacent A61. There is a small stone retaining wall and wooded embankment along the boundary which becomes a feature of the local landscape.  There is a PRoW which dissects the land parcel, connecting the A61 in the south east to the railway line to the north west. The PRoW can be difficult to negotiate due to the steep and undulating nature of the terrain in this particular location.

Visual analysis There are blocks of woodland located to the north and west - associated with Crimple Beck watercourse, Crimple Meadows and Sandy Bank - which close down medium to long range views of the parcel. Perceived visual receptors are:  High sensitivity residential receptors with the potential for immediate views are located 75m from the land parcel, along the A61 to the north east. Walton Head Farm, again located along the A61, may have potential for views from the south east.  Other highly sensitive residential receptors with views are located along Pannal Avenue approx. 200m in a northerly direction; Willow Farm B&B, approx. 300m to the north west; along Burn Bridge Oval, approx. 750m to the north west; along Westminster Drive, approx. 500m to the north west and Bilton Grove Farm, approx. 950m to the west of the parcel.  Proposed residential development within Phase 2a has the potential for

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 immediate views of the land parcel.  Medium sensitivity leisure receptors are located at Pannal Cricket Club, 175m to the north west.  Low sensitivity transport receptors using the Leeds to York railway line and the A61 would have direct, but transient views of the development.

Table 3.14 Landscape and Visual appraisal of Parcel F4, Development Option 2

Illustrative viewpoint Looking north across land parcel

Local LCA Area 62 – Wharfe Valley Side Farmland

Topography & views The land parcel is situated on rising land; the lowest point is in the west and lies at approx. 100m AOD, whilst the highest point lies in the east of the parcel at approx. 120m AOD. The gradient is shallower than Parcel 3A. A prominent ridgeline is positioned close to the north eastern boundary of the land parcel, which limits views from the north and east. There are blocks of woodland located to the north and west - associated with Crimple Beck watercourse, Crimple Meadows and Sandy Bank - which close down medium to long range views of the parcel. The railway line is located in a false cutting along the north western boundary of the parcel, limiting views.

Landscape qualities  The land parcel is not currently subject to any designations for reasons of landscape value.  The parcel comprises pastoral fields enclosed by mature native hedgerows with occasional trees. These are broken in sections along the A61.  Parts of the landscape, close to the north eastern boundary, can feel relatively open and form part of the rural agricultural setting of Pannal.  The land in the eastern-most part of the land parcel lies at a higher level than the adjacent A61. There is a stone retaining wall and wooded embankment along the boundary which becomes a feature of the local landscape.  There is a PRoW which dissects the land parcel, connecting the A61 in the south east to the railway line to the north west. The PRoW can be difficult to negotiate due to the steep and undulating nature of the terrain in this particular location.

Visual analysis  There are blocks of woodland located to the north and west - associated with Crimple Beck watercourse, Crimple Meadows and Sandy Bank - which close down medium to long range views of the parcel.  Development along the ridgeline may be viewed from highly sensitive residential receptors located along Pannal Avenue approx. 450m in a northerly direction; Willow Farm B&B, approx. 325m to the north west; along Burn Bridge Oval, approx. 8250m to the north west; along

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 Westminster Drive, approx. 600m to the north west and Bilton Grove Farm, approx. 600m to the west of the parcel.  Medium sensitivity leisure receptors are located at Pannal Cricket Club, 175m to the north west.  Low sensitivity transport receptors using the Leeds to York railway line and the A61 would have direct, transient views of the development. However, the railway line adjacent to this land parcel lies within a false cutting which minimises visual impact.

Table 3.15 Landscape and Visual appraisal of Parcel F5, Development Option 2

Illustrative viewpoint Looking south across land parcel

Local LCA Area 62 – Wharfe Valley Side Farmland

Topography & views The land parcel is situated on gently rising land with a shallow gradient; the lowest point is in the west and lies at approx. 100m AOD, whilst the highest point lies in the east of the parcel at approx. 105m AOD. The ridgeline approx. 300m to the north limits views from that direction. The railway line to the west lies within a vegetated false cutting, which provides some screening. There are also blocks of woodland located to the west (The Warren) and east (Walton Head Whin) which close down medium to long range views of the parcel. The landscape is relatively open to the south west and south.

Landscape qualities  The land parcel is not currently subject to any designations for reasons of landscape value.  The parcel comprises a singular arable field enclosed by mature native hedgerows with trees.  It forms part of a low lying landscape which topographically extends towards Pannal and the Crimple Valley.  The land in the eastern-most part of the land parcel lies at a slightly higher level than the adjacent A61.

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017  Low sensitivity transport receptors using the Leeds to York railway line, the A61 and the A658 would have direct, transient views of the development. However, the railway line adjacent to this land parcel lies partially within a false cutting which minimises visual impact.  Low sensitivity commercial receptors which adjoin Parcel F3B approx. 100m from the parcel have potential for direct views.

Table 3.16 Landscape and Visual appraisal of Parcel F3B, Development Option 2

Illustrative viewpoint Looking east across land parcel

Local LCA Area 62 – Wharfe Valley Side Farmland

Landscape qualities  The land parcel is not currently subject to any designations for reasons of landscape value.  The parcel comprises a singular arable field enclosed by mature native hedgerows with trees.  It forms part of a low lying landscape which topographically extends towards Pannal and the Crimple Valley.  The land in the eastern-most part of the parcel lies at a slightly higher level than the adjacent A61. There is a small stone retaining wall along the eastern boundary with the A61 which is a local landscape feature.

Visual analysis  There are numerous PRoW within adjacent agricultural land. Highly sensitive recreational views may be possible from rising land to the immediate west and east, approx. 500m from the land parcel.  High sensitivity residential receptors with the potential for immediate views are located approx. 200m from the land parcel, along the A61 at Butterskye Farm.  High sensitivity residential receptors at Nab Hill Farm along the A658, located approx. 200m from the parcel are likely to have views screened by an existing woodland within their property boundary.  Low sensitivity transport receptors using the Leeds to York railway line, the A61 and the A658 would have direct, transient views of the development. However, the railway line adjacent to this land parcel lies partially within a false cutting which minimises visual impact.  Low sensitivity commercial receptors adjoin the land parcel and have potential for direct views.

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 Conclusions

Green Belt appraisal summary 3.23 For the purposes of this report, the HBC allocations are referred to as Development Option 1, and the FI sites are referred to as Development Option 2. 3.24 In summary, the Green Belt assessment found that both development option sites play a strong role in relation to Purpose 3 - safeguarding the countryside from encroachment. 3.25 Key comparative differences between the development option sites relate to Purpose 2, Purpose 3 and Purpose 4. 3.26 In relation to Purpose 1a and 1b – checking the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas – Development Option 1 scores predominantly strongly whilst Development Option 2’s rating was Moderate. This demonstrates the proximity of these land parcels to existing large built-up areas. 3.27 The land encompassed by Development Option 1 plays a strong role in relation to Purpose 2 – preventing the merging of settlements – compared to a weak role for Development Option 2. This highlights that the land parcels within Development Option 1 play an essential role in preventing the merging or erosion of the gap between Pannal and Harrogate, whereas Development Option Two has a limited role in preventing the merging or erosion of the gap between Pannal and Leeds. 3.28 In relation to Purpose 4 – preserving the setting and special character of historic towns - two of the land parcels associated with Development Option 1 score a Moderate and Strong rating. This emphasises that these land parcels play a major / moderate role in the setting of Pannal Conservation Area and make a contribution to its special character.

Table 3.17 Comparative Summary of Green Belt Assessment Findings for all parcels Parcel Purpose 1a Purpose 1b Purpose 2 Purpose 3 Purpose 4 Reference Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating

Development Option 1 PN17 Strong Strong Strong Moderate Strong PN18 Strong Strong Strong Moderate Weak PN19 Strong Strong Strong Moderate Strong PN20 Moderate Strong Moderate Moderate Weak

Development Option 2 F3A Moderate Moderate Weak Moderate Weak F4 Moderate Moderate Weak Moderate Weak F5 Moderate Moderate Weak Moderate No contribution F3B Moderate Moderate Weak Moderate No contribution

Landscape and Visual appraisal summary Landscape value 3.29 The landscape value of land parcels associated with Development Option 1 is generally high due to the following reasons:  All sites are located within the Crimple Valley Special Landscape Area;  The sites are arable and pastoral fields generally enclosed by mature native hedgerows with occasional trees;  Land parcels PN17-19 are located in close proximity to the setting of Pannal Conservation Area;  The low lying landscape of land parcel PN18 contributes to the setting of the Grade II* listed viaduct (Leeds to York railway line) located to the north east of the parcel;

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017  The Grade II* listed St. Robert’s Parish Church is located immediately adjacent to PN19 and contributes to its setting;  Clark Beck and Crimple Beck watercourses are located within or immediately adjacent to parcels, PN17 and PN19. These watercourses are landscape features, and are considered to be heritage assets due to their role in the development pattern of the village; and  PN18 and PN19 have recreational value evidenced by PRoW crossing the sites. 3.30 The landscape value of land parcels associated with Development Option 2 is generally medium due to the following reasons:  There are no landscape designations in close proximity;  The sites are arable and pastoral fields generally enclosed by mature native hedgerows with occasional trees. Hedgerows can be broken in places. Timber post and rail fencing is also evidenced, predominantly enclosing parcel F3A adjacent to the new link road;  Land parcels F3A and F4 are situated on rising land, can feel relatively open in places, and make a contribution to the rural agricultural setting of Pannal;  A prominent ridgeline is positioned close to the north eastern boundary of parcel F4;  Local landscape features pertaining to all land parcels include stone retaining walls adjacent to the A61; and  F3A and F4 have recreational value evidenced by PRoW crossing the sites. Visual sensitivity 3.31 The visual sensitivity of Development Option 1 is summarised below:  Parcel PN17 is positioned within a Key View illustrated within the Pannal Conservation Area Appraisal document;  Long range views of the Grade II* listed viaduct (Leeds to York railway line) can be obtained from the A61 across the open landscape and land parcel PN18;  High sensitivity visual receptors using PRoW through PN18 and PN19 would have immediate views;  High sensitivity residential receptors located along Spring Lane, Yew Tree Lane, Clark Beck Close and Pannal Court would have immediate views, from the front of properties, in relation to parcels PN17, PN19 and PN20;  Long distance views of PN17 and PN19 from high sensitivity residential receptors are possible from Rossett Green Lane and Church Lane;  Medium sensitivity ecclesiastical receptors and education receptors associated with St. Robert’s Parish Church, Pannal Methodist Church and Pannal Primary School have a visual relationship with PN17 and PN19-20. 3.32 The visual sensitivity of Development Option 2 is summarised below:  Land parcels F3A and F4 are situated on rising land which has the potential to increase the visual envelope, particularly in relation to existing development within Pannal and Burn Bridge. However, there are established blocks of woodland located to the north and west - associated with Crimple Beck watercourse, Crimple Meadows and Sandy Bank - which close down medium to long range views of the parcel for the majority of receptors.  A small number of high sensitivity residential receptors are located within 250m of all land parcels; these tend to be farmsteads which are dotted through the countryside. These comprise of a couple of properties located 75m from land parcel F3A along the A61; properties along Pannal Avenue from upper floors; Walton Head Farm (A61); Butterskye Farm (A61) and Nab Hill Farm (A658).  Medium to long range highly sensitive views of F3A and F4 are possible from Willow Farm B&B; properties along Burn Bridge Oval and along Westminster Drive; and Bilton Grove Farm, to the west.

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017  Proposed residential development within Phase 2a has the potential for immediate views of the land parcel F3A and F4.  Medium sensitivity leisure receptors are located at Pannal Cricket Club, who would have views of F3A and F4.  Low sensitivity transport receptors would generally have immediate but transient views of all land parcels, but particularly parcels F5 and F3B. 3.33 Visual impacts have the potential to be mitigated through the introduction of structural planting belts (with an evergreen content) to screen development, and sensitive manipulation of the topography to encourage landscape integration. This is a greater challenge in Development Option 1 due to the immediacy of the visual receptors, the proximity to the Conservation Area, the change it would bring to the open character of the Special Landscape Area and the setting of Grade II* listed features such as the viaduct along the Leeds to York railway line and St. Robert’s Parish Church. This is reflected in the Council’s own sustainability appraisal of these sites which indicated that there are limited or no opportunities for such mitigation.

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 4 Mitigation and enhancement opportunities

4.1 This final part of the report describes ways in which the masterplanning and detailed design of the Forward Investments proposals could achieve the best possible landscape ‘fit’. It also outlines ways in which the Crimple Valley between Pannal and Harrogate could be safeguarded and managed to the benefit of the local community.

Landscape mitigation

4.2 While the sustainability appraisal undertaken by Harrogate Borough Council concluded that there would be limited opportunities to mitigate the landscape impacts of proposed allocations within the Crimple Valley, LUC’s assessment has identified a number of ways in which the design of the Forward Investments proposals could minimise landscape and visual effects whilst delivering wider community benefits. Proposals, which will form the basis of more detailed proposals for the scheme, include:  Supplementing existing boundary vegetation along the railway line and between land parcels to screen and filter views of the scheme, mitigating the visual impact and integrating the development into the landscape. This would be particularly effective along the railway line as it lies within a false cutting which will add to the height of the screening vegetation. Incorporating evergreens within planting mixes would also achieve screening in winter.  Newly planted stock along the link road will provide some visual screening to upper sections of the parcel.  Taking visual cues from the layout of development within Burn Bridge which lies on rising land at a comparative topographic range. Development here is set out perpendicular to the contour lines, minimising long range views across the valley. Back garden vegetation associated with these properties then provides visual enclosure to properties that are aligned with the contours.  Taking design cues from the recently completed Vida Grange care home which provides an example of how cutting into the landform has the potential to minimise visual sensitivities whilst creating interesting landscape features (gabion walls, stepped footpaths) and providing a wooded buffer to the busy road.  Creating a more accessible PRoW route connecting the A61 to land to the north would bring benefits to the wider community.  Setting the development at a distance from the A61 and integrating a green buffer to the road would elevate the quality of the public realm associated with the development, particularly in the southern part of the site where topographic screening is limited and the visual connection with Pannal is weaker. This would also enhance the character of the road and the experience of transport users.  Concentrating low level built development within the southern part of the scheme so as to minimise the visual envelope and integrate the development within the landscape.

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 Crimple Valley proposals

Site context 4.3 The Crimple Valley is a designated Special Landscape Area (SLA) which is offered protection by Policy NE4 of the emerging HBC Local Plan. Policy highlights that SLAs are valued locally for their high quality landscape and importance to the settings of settlements such as Pannal. In this location, the SLA is concerned with the preventing the coalescence of Harrogate and Pannal. 4.4 It is considered that development within SLAs should be linked to existing settlements and designed to enhance the appearance of the urban edge and its integration with the countryside. Development should also avoid significant loss of the key characteristics that contribute to the quality of the SLA. 4.5 Forward Investment would seek to purchase the land located within the Crimple Valley SLA from HBC and gift the land to the community using a vehicle such as a community trust. With the proposals set out below, it is anticipated that the valley could be designated as a Local Greenspace or Green Belt. This would ensure that the land remained open and accessible to the community of Pannal, for recreational use and enabling access to the Crimple Beck which is considered to be a local heritage asset and landscape feature.

Concept Masterplan 4.6 A concept masterplan for the land located within the SLA is illustrated in Figure 5. The purpose of the masterplan is to highlight the potential for improvements and the benefits this would bring to the wider community, whilst also safeguarding the enjoyment for generations. 4.7 Key themes that have been explored are:  improving physical access and connectivity for multiple users generally, creating looped footpaths which take the user on a journey;  encouraging visual access towards Crimple Beck through the introduction of a waterside route. There is potential to incorporate seating along or close to the water’s edge;  the creation of a connection through to Crimple Hall Garden Centre through the introduction of a river walkway, which would provide the user with a more sustainable mode of travel to a local destination;  strengthening the existing visual access to the Grade II* listed viaduct, Grade II* listed St. Robert’s Parish Church and the wider landscape generally through the introduction of viewing spaces. Integrating sensitively designed seating in these locations would create environments where people can appreciate the rural setting;  creating opportunities to improve the setting of St. Robert’s Parish Church through sensitively designed gateway features, made from materials which pertain to the locality and instil a sense of place;  the supplementation of planting to mitigate views of the A61 and create a more pleasant environment for explorers of the countryside. Furthermore, by incorporating buffer planting incorporating native, evergreen species and sensory species, a separate multi-user route or greenway could be created which would then take cyclists and pedestrians away from the highly trafficked A61; and  the introduction of public art, gateway features and wayfinding. These could be designed by local artists and use local materials which would create a sense of place. Gateway features have the potential to herald the entrances to the waterside route and the greenway.

Pannal, Harrogate Landscape and Green Belt Options Appraisal August 2017 "

Harrogate Train Pannal, Harrogate station " Green Belt support

Figure 1

Hornbeam Park Train Harrogate Borough Council station " Draft Allocation Sites (Development Option 1)

Forward Investment Sites (Development Option 2)

Green Belt

" Train station

Railway line PN19 PN18 PN17 A Road B Road

PN20 Pannal " Train F4 F3A station

F5 F3B

Weeton Source: OS, DCLG, HBC, Train Forward Investment station " Map Scale @ A4: 1:50,000

0 1 2 E km © Crown copyright and database rights 2017 Ordnance Survey 0100031673 CB:VT EB:Tzampoura_V LUC 10057_Fig1_A4L 18/08/2017 © Natural England copyright 2017. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2017 Birkham Wood SSSI Pannal, Harrogate Green Belt support Birk Crag LNR

Valley Gardens Hookstone Wood LNR Figure 2

Rossett Harrogate Borough Council Nature Draft Allocation Sites Reserve LNR Plumpton (Development Option 1) Rocks Forward Investment Sites (Development Option 2)

Local Nature Reserve

Rudding Park Registered Parks and Gardens Sites of Special Scientific PN19 PN18 Interest PN17 Ancient Woodland

Crimple Valley Special Landscape Area The Woods PN20

F4 F3A

Parkins Wood

F5 F3B

Great Almscliff Crag SSSI

Source: OS, HBC, Natural England Forward Investment

Map Scale @ A4: 1:50,000

0 1 2 E km © Crown copyright and database rights 2017 Ordnance Survey 0100031673 CB:VT EB:Tzampoura_V LUC 10057_Fig2_A4L 21/08/2017 © Natural England copyright 2017. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2017 0 0 4 0 1 1 R S i t n on Pannal, Harrogate gs e B e Green Belt support ck

130 PN18 0 1 1 0 1 2 Figure 3 40 1 0 2 0 C 1 0 lar 1 k B e 0 ck 9 Harrogate Borough Council

0 1 Draft Allocation Sites 1 1 PN17

0 PN19 0 (Development Option 1)

8 1 6 0 0 3 Forward Investment Sites 1 (Development Option 2)

90 Watercourse

0 2 1 Contour PN20

1 3 0

0 0 1

0 0 k 1 ec B e pl m ri C

1 1 1 3

0 90

0 4 1

0 0 1 F4 0

1 k ec B rn Ho F3A

5 0 0 12

1 1 0 0 4 0

0 1 3 5 1

0 15

0 0 1 Source: OS, HBC, Forward Investment

F3B Map Scale @ A4: 1:15,000

0 3 1 1 1 0 0.5 1 2 4 1 0 5 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 km 11 0 E 1 3 1 © Crown copyright and database rights 2017 Ordnance Survey 0100031673 CB:VT EB:Tzampoura_V LUC 10057_Fig3_A4L 18/08/2017 Pannal, Harrogate Green Belt support

Figure 4

A Road

1 6 " Train station A Railway line

Public Rights of Way

Bridleway Footpath

Listed building

Grade II* Grade II

Conservation area Pannal Train Greenspace station Cemetery or Churchyard Sports Facility Play Space

8 A65

Source: OS, HBC, Historic England

Map Scale @ A4: 1:15,000

0 0.5 1 E km © Crown copyright and database rights 2017 Ordnance Survey 0100031673 CB:VT EB:Tzampoura_V LUC 10057_Fig4_A4L 18/08/2017 © Historic England copyright 2017. Precedents FIGURE 5: CRIMPLE VALLEY CONCEPT PROPOSALS Public Art

Artwork inkeeping with the rural setting Multi-user routes and River access

PN19 PN18

PN20 multi-user route with bu er planting sinuous routes and in-keeping Riverside access / seating and materiality crossing points Viewing spaces

Utilising rural vantages Attractive seating environment Gateway Features and Waynding

Key NTS Gateway and signage strengthening sense of place / arrival Improve waynding Key view / vista Proposed development boundary Boundary treatments

Proposed footpath location Proposed multi-user route with buffer planting to road Existing PROW / bridleway Proposed riverway route Proposed key junction location Proposed river crossing Proposed gateway feature location incorporating Key seating / viewing areas Gritstone walls, local boundary In-keeping boundary materiality boundary treatment materials and public art locations materiality Part B (please use a separate Part B form for each representation)

Mr Jay Everett/Addison Planning Consultants Ltd Name/Organisation:

3a. To which document does your response relate? (Please tick one)

Harrogate District Local Plan Publication Draft ✓ Habitat Regulations Assessment ☐

Sustainability Appraisal ☐ Equality Analysis Report ☐

3b. If you are making comments, to which part of the document do they relate? (Complete any that apply)

261 DM1 Page no. Paragraph no. Policy Ref.

PN17 PN18 PN19 Pannal Development Limit Site Ref. (put name of settlement) Policies Map P20

4. Do you consider the Plan is:

4.(1) Legally compliant Yes ☐ No ☐ 4.(2) Sound Yes ☐ No ☒

→ If you have selected No to Question 4.(2), please continue to Question 5 → In all other circumstances please go to Question 6

5. If you consider the Development Plan is UNSOUND, do you consider this to be because it is NOT: (tick all that apply)

Positively prepared ✓ Justified ☐ Effective ✓ Consistent with national policy ☐

What makes a Local Plan “sound”?

Positively prepared - the plan should be prepared in a way that meets the need for housing and other development, including infrastructure and business development.

Justified – the plan should be based on evidence, and be the most appropriate strategy for the district when considered against other reasonable alternatives.

Effective – the plan should be deliverable; the housing and other development should be capable of being carried out.

Consistent with national policy – the plan should enable sustainable development and be consistent with the policies in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

PLEASE SEE COVERING LETTER BY APC LTD – DATED 08-03-2018

FI are owners of proposed Mixed-Use Allocation PN15. Site PN15 (the former Dunlopillo site) is currently being redeveloped. Phase 1 (the Vida Grange care home) and main access road through the Green Belt has been completed. Phase 2, a residential development of 128 homes, has recently been sold to Bellway Homes; Reserved Matters permission has been granted and work is due to commence shortly on delivery of the 128 homes.

• Insufficient smaller and medium sized allocations have been identified around the key transport node of Pannal Station to provide flexibility and choice to meet the minimum housing requirement.

• The identified supply for this Primary Service Village are located in the highly sensitive Crimple Valley and are unlikely to be deliverable.

• There are other available sites in Pannal that are more sustainable than the sites proposed as Allocations by the Council. Sites F3A, F4, F5 and F3B are significantly more sustainable than the Council’s own proposals within the Crimple Valley; and

• There are exceptional site-specific circumstances to justify allocating Green Belt land as part of the Local Plan process (without undertaking a comprehensive Green Belt Review).

This Representation sets out:

• Details of a proposition to allocate land to the south of Pannal instead of land in the Crimple Valley and to protect the Crimple Valley from future development.

• A summary of independent evidence that has been prepared to assess all of the development options in Pannal against landscape and Green Belt teststerests. FI object to the above listed Policies of the draft Local Plan on the basis they are UNSOUND.

(If you are suggesting that the plan is legally compliant or sound please write N/A)

For the reasons set out in the Covering Letter by APC 08-03-2018 Policy DM1 should be amended by:

Deleting proposed Allocations PN17, PN18, PN19 and PN20

Allocating Sites F3A, F4, F5 and F3B for housing and employment development.

After this stage, further submissions will only be at the request of the Inspector, based on the matters and issues she/he identifies for examination.

No, I do not wish to participate at the Yes, I wish to appear  hearing session at the examination. I would at the examination like my representation to be dealt with by written representation

If you have selected No, your representation(s) will still be considered by the independent Planning Inspector by way of written representations.

9. If you wish to participate at the oral part of the examination, please outline why you consider this to be necessary:

The issues raised are complex and require debate.

Please note: the Inspector will determine the most appropriate procedure to adopt to hear those who have indicated that they wish to participate at the hearing session of the examination.

J EVERETT 8TH MARCH 2018 Signature Date

Please return the completed form by no later than 4.30pm on Friday 9 March 2018 to: Planning Policy Team, Harrogate Borough Council, PO Box 787, Harrogate, HG1 9RW or email: [email protected]

(Electronic copies of this form are available to download at www.harrogate.gov.uk/localplan )

Data Protection

Representations must be received by 4.30pm on Friday 9 March 2018. Representations received after this time will not be considered duly made. RE: DRAFT LOCAL PLAN: ADDITIONAL SITES CONSULTATION 2017: SITES PN17, PN18, PN19, PN20 – PROPOSED ALLOCATIONS AT PANNAL AND OMIISSION SITES – LAND TO THE SOUTH OF PANNAL PRELIMINARY SUSTAINABILITY APPRAISAL COMPARISON OF SITES IN PANNAL

HBC proposed allocation HBC proposed allocation HBC proposed allocation Forward Investments Forward Investments Forward Investments Forward Investments PN17 PN18 PN19 F3A F4 F5 F3B Quality housing available to Site size does allow for Site is proposed for Site size does allow for Site size does allow for Site size does allow for Site is proposed for Site is proposed for everyone. affordable housing. employment use. affordable housing. affordable housing. affordable housing. employment use. employment use. All housing should meet All housing should meet All housing should meet All housing should meet nationally set standards for nationally set standards for nationally set standards for nationally set standards for energy efficiency and energy efficiency and energy efficiency and energy efficiency and sustainability. sustainability. sustainability. sustainability. Conditions and services to Accessible to play Site is proposed for Accessible to play Accessible to play Accessible to play Site is proposed for Site is proposed for engender good health. area/amenity open employment use. area/amenity open area/amenity open area/amenity open employment use. employment use. space/outdoor sports. space/outdoor sports and space/outdoor sports and space/outdoor sports and large enough to large enough to large enough to accommodate new play area. accommodate new play area. accommodate new play area. Site is large enough to New outdoor sports facility New outdoor sports facility accommodate a new outdoor already provided in phase 2. already provided in phase 2. sports facility and help meet a local shortfall. Safety and security for people Dependent on application of Dependent on application of Dependent on application of Dependent on application of Dependent on application of Dependent on application of Dependent on application of and property. design policies and design policies and design policies and design policies and design policies and design policies and design policies and community policing. community policing. community policing. community policing. community policing. community policing. community policing. Vibrant communities that Provision of affordable Site is proposed for Provision of affordable Provision of affordable Provision of affordable Site is proposed for Site is proposed for participate in decision housing will help reduce employment use. housing will help reduce housing will help reduce housing will help reduce employment use. employment use. making. social isolation. social isolation. social isolation. social isolation. Local school at or near Potential for mixed use Proposal includes provision of Proposal includes provision of capacity and may require including community new primary school and new primary school and expansion facilities. related facilities. related facilities. Local school at or near capacity and likely to require expansion. Culture, leisure and Can meet recreational needs Does not contain features of Can meet recreation needs of Can meet recreational needs Can meet recreational needs Does not contain features of Does not contain features of recreation activities available of the area. recreation or amenity value. the area. of the area. of the area. recreation or amenity value. recreation or amenity value. to all. Does not contain features of Does not contain features of Does not contain features of Does not contain features of recreation or amenity value. recreation or amenity value. recreation or amenity value. recreation or amenity value. Local needs met locally. Some accessibility to local Good accessibility to local Good accessibility to services Good accessibility to local Good accessibility to local Some accessibility to local Some accessibility to local services but poor services but poor but poor accessibility to services, including to railway services, including to railway services but poor services but poor accessibility to bus, rail, accessibility to primary and secondary schools and station and bus stop on A61. station and bus stop on A61. accessibility to bus, rail, accessibility to bus, rail, secondary school, shopping secondary schools. shops. Wheelchair access provided Wheelchair access provided secondary school, shopping secondary school, shopping facilities and employment. along new link road. Poor along new link road. Poor facilities facilities accessibility to secondary accessibility to secondary schools. schools. Education and training Local primary school at or Proposed for employment- Local primary school at or Proposal includes provision of Proposal includes provision of Proposed for employment- Proposed for employment- opportunities which build on near capacity and likely to may bring opportunities for near capacity and likely to new primary school and new primary school and may bring opportunities for may bring opportunities for the skills and capacity of the require expansion. apprenticeships and training. require expansion. related facilities. related facilities. apprenticeships and training. apprenticeships and training. population Biodiversity and importance Some potential adverse Significant adverse effects on Some potential adverse Some potential adverse Some potential adverse Some potential adverse Some potential adverse of the natural environment. effects on biodiversity but biodiversity. effects but mitigation should effects on biodiversity but effects on biodiversity but effects on biodiversity but effects on biodiversity but relatively easy to mitigate. Need not involve loss of be possible. relatively easy to mitigate. relatively easy to mitigate. relatively easy to mitigate. relatively easy to mitigate. Need not result in loss of woodlands/trees and Loss of ancient woodland, Need not result in loss of Need not result in loss of Need not result in loss of Need not result in loss of woodland/ trees. potential for significant aged or veteran trees. woodland/ trees. woodland/ trees. woodland/ trees. woodland/ trees. The site is large enough to woodland creation. The site is large enough to The site is large enough to The site is large enough to The site is large enough to The site is large enough to incorporate new natural The site is large enough to incorporate new natural incorporate new natural incorporate new natural incorporate new natural add to green infrastructure. green space and add to incorporate new natural green space and add to green space and add to green space and add to green space and add to Environment Agency - green infrastructure. green space and add to green infrastructure. green infrastructure. green infrastructure. green infrastructure. impacts cannot be predicted Environment Agency - green infrastructure. Public right of way within or Environment Agency - Environment Agency - Environment Agency - at this stage. impacts cannot be predicted Public right of way within or close to the site. impacts cannot be predicted impacts cannot be predicted impacts cannot be predicted Medium / low landscape at this stage. close to the site. Environment Agency - at this stage. at this stage. at this stage. sensitivity. High/ Medium landscape Environment Agency - impacts cannot be predicted Medium / low landscape Medium / low landscape Medium / low landscape Medium/low landscape sensitivity. impacts cannot be predicted at this stage. sensitivity. sensitivity. sensitivity. capacity to accommodate Low landscape capacity to at this stage. Landscape sensitivity rating: Medium landscape capacity Medium landscape capacity Medium landscape capacity development proposed – accommodate development Landscape sensitivity rating: high to accommodate to accommodate to accommodate Some potential to mitigate. proposed - mitigation high Landscape capacity: limited development proposed - development proposed - development proposed - opportunities limited. Landscape capacity: limited or no capacity to relatively easy to mitigate. relatively easy to mitigate. relatively easy to mitigate. or no capacity to accommodate development accommodate development or mitigate impacts. or mitigate impacts.

1 | P a g e DRAFT LOCAL PLAN REPRESENTATION BY APC ON BEHALF OF FORWARD INVESTMENT – 25TH AUGUST 2017 Minimal pollution levels. Yorkshire Water - impacts in Yorkshire Water - impacts in Yorkshire Water- impacts in Yorkshire Water - impacts in Yorkshire Water - impacts in Yorkshire Water - impacts in Yorkshire Water - impacts in relation to waste water and relation to waste water and relation to waste water and relation to waste water and relation to waste water and relation to waste water and relation to waste water and water infrastructure cannot water infrastructure cannot water infrastructure cannot water infrastructure cannot water infrastructure cannot water infrastructure cannot water infrastructure cannot be predicted at this stage. be predicted at this stage. be predicted at this stage. be predicted at this stage. be predicted at this stage. be predicted at this stage. be predicted at this stage. Positive effects: Positive effects: Positive effects: Positive effects: Positive effects: Positive effects: Positive effects: Unlikely to impact on air Unlikely to have impact on Unlikely to have an impact Unlikely to impact on air Unlikely to impact on air Unlikely to have impact on Unlikely to have impact on quality. air quality. on air quality. quality. quality. air quality. air quality. Negative effects: Negative effects: Negative effects: Negative effects: Negative effects: Negative effects: Negative effects: Some adverse effect on Some adverse effect on Some adverse effects on Some adverse effect on Some adverse effect on Some adverse effect on Some adverse effect on surface water and surface water and watercourses. surface water and surface water and surface water and surface water and watercourses - mitigation watercourses - mitigation 100% greenfield land. watercourses - mitigation watercourses - mitigation watercourses - mitigation watercourses - mitigation possible. may not be possible. 50% or more Grade 3 possible. possible. may not be possible. may not be possible. Loss of grade 3 agricultural Loss of grade 3 agricultural agricultural land. Loss of grade 3 agricultural Loss of grade 3 agricultural Loss of grade 3 agricultural Loss of grade 3 agricultural land. land. Close to major road. land. land. land. land. A major road, the A61, lies A major road, the A61, lies A major road, the A61, lies close to the site. close to the site. close to the site. A transport network which Significant transport/and or Significant transport and/or Significant transport and/or Accessibility already provided Accessibility already provided Significant transport and/or Significant transport and/or maximises access whilst accessibility/cumulative accessibility problems accessibility problems via new link road with safe via new link road with safe accessibility problems accessibility problems minimising detrimental impact problems requiring although developer funded although developer funded pedestrian access to village pedestrian access to village although developer funded although developer funded impacts substantial mitigation. mitigation can address. mitigation can address. centre. centre. mitigation can address. mitigation can address. Increased public transport Increased public transport Increased public transport Increased public transport Increased public transport Increased public transport Increased public transport provision and extension of provision and extension of provision and extension of provision and extension of provision and extension of provision and extension of provision and extension of services cannot be predicted services cannot be predicted services cannot be predicted services cannot be predicted services cannot be predicted services cannot be predicted services cannot be predicted at this stage. at this stage. at this stage. at this stage, though safe at this stage, though safe at this stage. at this stage. Poor connectivity to cycle Poor connectivity to cycling Poor connectivity to cycling pedestrian and cycle link to pedestrian and cycle link to Poor connectivity to cycling Poor connectivity to cycling routes. routes. routes. station and access to bus station and access to bus routes. routes. Lack of pavements does not Some pedestrian access and Convenient and safe stop on A61. stop on A61. encourage pedestrian access safety issues. pedestrian routes to access to services. Severance can be overcome. services and facilities. Significant barrier to Opportunity to provide new Severance can be overcome. accessibility. rail station. Opportunity to enhance existing rail facilities. Minimise greenhouse gas Bus stop within 400m Site is not within 400m of a Site does not lie within 400m Site is not within 400m of a Site is not within 400m of a Site is not within 400m of a Site is not within 400m of a emissions and a managed 50% within Flood Zone 1 bus stop. of a bus stop however there bus stop. bus stop. bus stop. bus stop. response to climate change. Site is wholly within flood is potential for improvement. Site is wholly within flood Site is wholly within flood Site is wholly within flood Site is wholly within flood zone 1. Site lies wholly within flood zone 1. zone 1. zone 1. zone 1. zone 1. Prudent and efficient use of All new development will All new development will All new development will All new development will All new development will All new development will All new development will energy and natural resources increase use of primary increase use of primary increase use of primary increase use of primary increase use of primary increase use of primary increase use of primary with minimal production of resources and increases resources and increases resources and increases resources and increases resources and increases resources and increases resources and increases waste energy and water energy and water energy and water energy and water energy and water energy and water energy and water consumption and waste. consumption and waste. consumption and waste. consumption and waste. consumption and waste. consumption and waste. consumption and waste. Would involve the loss of Would involve the loss of Would involve the loss of Would involve the loss of Would involve the loss of Would involve the loss of Would involve the loss of Grade 1, 2 or 3 agricultural Grade 1, 2 or 3 agricultural Grade 1, 2 or 3 agricultural Grade 1, 2 or 3 agricultural Grade 1, 2 or 3 agricultural Grade 1, 2 or 3 agricultural Grade 1, 2 or 3 agricultural land. land. land. land. land. land. land. Protect and enhance the Likely to harm significance of Likely to result in harm to Likely to result in harm to Harm to heritage assets Harm to heritage assets Harm to heritage assets Harm to heritage assets historic environment. heritage asset. significance of heritage significance of heritage unlikely unlikely unlikely unlikely asset. asset. A quality built environment Negative impact on local Negative impact on local Negative impact on local Potential to conserve and Potential to conserve and Some impact on local Some impact on local and efficient land use distinctiveness. distinctiveness. distinctiveness. reinforce local reinforce local distinctiveness. distinctiveness. patterns. Mixed use can be Mixed use can be distinctiveness. distinctiveness. accommodated. accommodated. Good quality employment Only proposed for residential Proposed for employment. Proposed for residential only. Only proposed for residential Only proposed for residential Proposed for employment. Proposed for employment. opportunities available to all development. Public transport provision development. Close to development. Close to Public transport provision Public transport provision cannot be predicted a this employment / office park on employment / office park on cannot be predicted a this cannot be predicted a this stage. former Dunlopillo site. former Dunlopillo site. stage. stage. Conditions for business Provision of affordable Provision of employment land Provision of affordable Provision of affordable Provision of affordable Provision of employment land Provision of employment land success, economic growth housing as part of scheme will encourage investment housing as part of scheme housing as part of scheme housing as part of scheme will encourage investment will encourage investment and investment encourages investment and and support local business encourages investment and encourages investment and encourages investment and and support local business and support local business local business expansion expansion. local business expansion local business expansion local business expansion expansion. expansion.

Forward Investments proposal performs better than comparable HBC proposed allocations

Forward Investments proposal has similar performance to comparable HBC proposed allocations

Forward Investments proposal performs worse than comparable HBC proposed allocations

2 | P a g e DRAFT LOCAL PLAN REPRESENTATION BY APC ON BEHALF OF FORWARD INVESTMENT – 25TH AUGUST 2017