Agenda and minutes

Resolved

That the amended minutes of the meeting of Strategic Planning Committee, held on 8 October 2024, be confirmed by Members and signed by the Chair as a correct record.

All Members declared that they had received correspondence from either supporters, objectors or both to the applications being considered but, unless otherwise stated below, would form their opinion based on the evidence provided at the meeting.

Councillor Timothy declared that he works as a case worker for Tom Gordon MP, who had received representations from members of the public relating to Item 4 on the agenda. He declared that he had an open mind.

Cllr McCartney declared a personal interest in relation to Minute 78/79 (Settrington Quarry) and so declared that he would depart from the meeting for these items.

Considered

The report of the Head of Development Management – Community Development

Services requesting Members to determine a planning application for the erection of

ground mounted solar farm (up to 43MW) and associated infrastructure including access to theA61, internal access tracks, customer substation, DNO building, storage container, 2no. power stations, pole mounted CCTV, fencing and landscaping - Land East Of Wormald Green, Wormald Green, North Yorkshire.

The application was brought to the Committee as it was an application accompanied by an Environmental Impact Assessment that was recommended for approval.

A Planning Officer presented the Committee report highlighting the proposal; the site location, viewpoints and description; the context to the application; planning guidance; and policy and planning considerations. The report also provided a conclusion and recommendation.

Councillor Keith Townson - Burton Leonard Parish Council addressed the Committee

highlighting the following.

·        Flooding issues affecting local communities in that area.

·        Surface water issues being exacerbated should the application be approved.

·        The impact on the local community of materials being transported onto the site and security lighting

Frances Nicholson of Harmony Energy, the applicant, addressed the Committee

highlighting the following.

·        The recommendation for approval was welcomed.

·        The development would assist with addressing the climate emergency and achieving net zero carbon emissions.

·        It would provide a significant contribution to energy supplies.

·        A substantial biodiversity net gain would be achieved.

·        The land being utilised for the development was not fertile.

·        It also supported farming diversification issues.

Members discussed the application and the following issues were raised:-

·        Clarification was provided in respect of the connection to the Grid and it was noted that a separate application would be required in respect of the routing of the cables. Details of the proposed route for the cables were outlined. It was noted that the provision of the cables and development of a sub-station could potentially be dealt with through delegated authority, however, if required, the details would be brought before the Committee.

·        Proximity to the salt barns was clarified.

·        It was noted that lighting matters would be addressed through the condition 10. Members stressed the importance of controlling lighting in predominantly rural areas.

·        A Member suggested that the maintenance of the ground on which the panels were situated should use grazing rather than spraying to enhance environmental benefits. In response it was stated that consideration would be given to conditioning this.

·        Overall the benefits of the proposed development outweighed the disadvantages.

·        It was suggested that it be ensured the access track be implanted as early as possible in the development to prevent the over use of local roads.

·        Members considered it appropriate to allow the case officer to negotiate with the applicant the additional factors suggested during consideration of the application.

Resolved

That planning permission be GRANTED subject to conditions listed in the report and

the completion of a S106 agreement with terms as detailed in Table 1 of the report.

The voting on this resolution was unanimous.

Considered

The report of the Assistant Director Planning – Community Development Service requesting Members to determine an outline planning application for the erection of up to 480 dwellings, provision of football pitches and ancillary building, provision of cricket pitch and pavilion, with associated access roads, car parking, landscaping, open space and infrastructure including works to the adopted highway to create site accesses. All outline matters reserved except for points of access - Land comprising field at Grid Reference 428025 453431, Beckwith Head Road, Harrogate, North Yorkshire.

The application was brought before the Committee because it was an application required to be accompanied by an Environmental Impact Statement and because the site was part of a wider ‘urban extension’ to the West of Harrogate.

A Planning Officer presented the Committee report, highlighting the proposal; the site location and description; the context to the application; planning guidance; and policy and planning considerations. The report also provided a conclusion and recommendations. Updates were provided in respect of further representations received after the publication of the papers in relation to the impacts of the building and the safety of pedestrians and cyclists.

Matthew Richards – Homes England (the applicant) addressed the Committee and highlighted the following.

·        There was a need for substantially more homes across the country and this development, which accords with the local plan, assisted that.

·        The principle of the development was well acknowledged and is in line with the plan.

·        Various local amenities that would substantially enhance the area were included in the proposals.

·        The aim was to provide a “Yorkshire Village” type development and deliver significant additional homes for the West of Harrogate.

Derek Spence, representing Beckwithshaw Parish Council and Harlow and Pannal Ash Residents’ Association, addressed the Committee and highlighted the following.

·        The proposals would bring a huge change to the nature of the area • The current infrastructure cannot support the level of development and the strategic infrastructure package does not adequately support it either.

·        There would be increased congestion and risk of road accidents.

·        Negative environmental impact and the failure to better incorporate sustainable travel.

·        There had been little, if any consultation, with local residents regarding the proposals.

Members discussed the application and the following issues were outlined

·        Concern was raised regarding the lack of consultation with local residents, as indicated by the speaker. In response it was noted that a series of events had been undertaken by the Council when the development plan, in which this was detailed, had been developed.

·        The provision of 40% affordable housing within the scheme was welcomed, but it was noted that there was no conditioning in relation to how these would be integrated into the overall development. In response it was stated these issues would be determined at the reserved matters stage with further applications submitted for the Committee to determine.

·        It was asked whether allotments could be added to the proposals to enhance the “Yorkshire Village” feel. In response it was stated that it would be difficult to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 75.

Considered

The report of the Assistant Director Planning – Community Development Service requesting Members to determine an outline planning permission with all matters reserved apart from access for the construction of a motorway service area comprised of an amenity building; petrol filling station; drive-thru coffee shop; parking facilities; internal access roads; services areas and other associated facilities including landscaping and amenity areas with a new roundabout junction and other highway works on the A6055 - Barton Motorway Truck Stop, Junction 56 A1(M), Barton, DL10 6NA.

The application was referred to the Committee due to the strategic nature of the proposal being a Motorway Service Area (MSA), raising significant material planning considerations that affect more than one area committee geography.

A Planning Officer presented the Committee report, highlighting the proposal; the site location and description; the context to the application; planning guidance; and policy and planning considerations. The report also provided a conclusion and recommendations.

An update to the report had been published prior to the meeting which corrected a small number of inaccuracies within the original report, provided details of additional representations received since the publication of the original report and an assessment in relation to provisions for abnormal loads.

Additional conditions were also suggested, as follows.

A.     The development hereby approved shall not be brought into first use until a National Highways signage agreement has been obtained and such signage provided for direction signing for the Motorway Service Area from and to the A1(M).

Reason: For the safety and efficient operation of the Strategic Road network

B.     The internal road layout shall provide equivalent provisions as detailed by plan 7690_06 Rev G6 and be designed to accommodate abnormal loads.

Reason: For the safe and efficient operation of the development and to ensure it designed to an appropriate standard for this type of facility.

Councillor Carl Les, Divisional Member for Catterick Village and Brompton on Swale, submitted a statement that was read out by the clerk, which related to this application and the application detailed at Minute Number 77. He highlighted the following.

·        The applications related to two Motorway Service Areas within 10 miles of each other, one (Minute Number 76) a brownfield site and the other (Minute Number 77) a greenfield site.

·        Local residents were opposed to the development detailed in Minute Number 77.

·        There would be extraordinary number of rest sites and available facilities on a relatively short stretch of road should both of the applications be approved.

·        Support should be given to the development of the brownfield site (Minute Number 76) and not the greenfield site (Minute Number 77).

Councillor Angus Thompson, Divisional Member for North Richmondshire, submitted a statement that was read out by the clerk, highlighting the following.

·        The current facilities at Barton were neglected and in need of upgrading.

·        The application provided an opportunity to update the facilities, on a brownfield site that would assist all users of the road network.

·        There was a need ensure that large vehicles did not pass through  ...  view the full minutes text for item 76.

Considered

The report of the Head of Development Management – Community Development Service requesting Members to determine an application for full Planning Permission for Motorway Service Area comprising amenity building, (Shops, Restaurants, Lounges, Tourist Information, Gaming Room and Cash Machines, Toilet Facilities, Administration Offices and Staff facilities, Servicing, Storage Areas, and ancillary uses), 100 bedroomed hotel, Drive Thru Costa and McDonald's Restaurants, fuel filling station with shop (total 10,855 sq. m Gross Floorspace), car, lorry, motorbike, cycle, caravan and coach parking, Electric Vehicle Charging facilities, amenity lake and associated landscaping with dog walking facilities and landscaping with access to J52 on the A1(M) (as amended) - Land East of Junction 52 on the A1(M) At Catterick, Pallett Hill Farm, Catterick Village, DL10 7PG

The application was referred to the Committee due to the strategic nature of the proposal being a Motorway Service Area (MSA), raising significant material planning considerations that affect more than one area committee geography.

A Planning Officer presented the Committee report, highlighting the proposal; the site location and description; the context to the application; planning guidance; and policy and planning considerations. The report also provided a conclusion and recommendations.

An update to the report had been published prior to the meeting which corrected a small number of inaccuracies within the original report, provided details of additional representations received since the publication of the original report and an assessment in relation the Scheduled Ancient Monument.

Updates to the conditions highlighted the following.

Condition 2 Edits

Approved Plan Condition (2) updated to delete the following documents, as these are informative rather than aspects needing to be complied with OR they are secured by the S106:

-        Statement of Community Involvement

-        Comparative Analysis of MSA Applications by Montagu Evans dated 3rd April 2024

-        East Cowton proposed flood plain grassland nature conservation area. Lower Ure Conservation Trust dated March 2024.

-        ADAS letter Ecological opinion dated 03 April 2024

-        Biodiversity Net Gain Assessment ADAS document dated 23rd January 2024

Add:

-        Landscape Masterplan 1836.10J

Replace:

218257/01 OVERALL LAYOUT with Overall Layout 218257-D01-P5B

Condition 2 and 14 Edit

Flood risk assessment changed to refer to approved document: 881624-R1(01)-FRA Flood Risk Assessment & 881624_L01_KJ Flood Risk Addendum

Liz Dinsmore of the Campaign to Save Catterick addressed the Committee, highlighting the following.

·        There was no evidence of need with a number of similar facilities already in place.

·        There was a mandate from the Government to protect the countryside and the proposals were contrary to this.

·        The site had a large amount of biodiversity, was a nature conservation site, and housed a number of protected species.

·        The data provided with the report was not up-to-date.

·        The area was within the flood plain.

·        A new infrastructure around the facilities would be required adding further development to the area.

Jennifer Smith of Smith Jenkins Planning and Heritage (at the discretion of the Chair) addressed the Committee and outlined the following.

·        As the facilities at Barton had just been approved there was no need for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 77.

The following applications (Minutes 78 and 79) were the subject of a single presentation as both related to the same site. Public speaking time was extended to take account of there being two applications.

Considered

The reports of the Assistant Director Planning – Community Development Service requesting Members to determine applications to extend Settrington Quarry with restoration to nature conservation habitat on land at Settrington Quarry, Back Lane, Settrington, Malton, YO17 8NX.

and

to vary condition No. 1 of Planning Permission Ref. C3/19/01386/CPO to allow an extension of time to recover remaining mineral resources on land at Settrington Quarry, Back Lane, Settrington, Malton, North Yorkshire, YO17 8NX

The applications related to a sizeable quarry operation that were subject to objections raised in respect of a range of material planning issues and were, therefore reported to the Committee for determination.

A Planning Officer presented the two Committee reports, highlighting the proposals; the site location and description; the context to the applications; planning guidance; and policy and planning considerations. The reports also provided conclusions and recommendations.

Updates to the reports highlighted alterations to Conditions 2 and 9, an increase in the number of objections and details of a further objection received after the publication of the reports.

Kenelm Storey a local resident objecting to the proposals addressed the Committee highlighting the following.

·        Settrington was a quiet rural village • The quarry should now be for restoration only.

·        The workings at the quarry, particularly the blasting and pecking, had been a major inconvenience for those in the village, specifically those that lived nearby, for many years.

·        There had been previous complaints regarding noise, local residents did not agree with the issues set out by the Case Officer and the reports under exaggerated the impact of the work on the local community.

·        The restoration plan was unacceptable.

·        There were large numbers of HGVs entering and leaving the site on a daily basis, beyond what was detailed in the report. These were damaging the local roads and verges and creating pollution. There had been a recent fatal accident near to the site.

·        The quarry was close to a number of sensitive areas, including an SSI, and Settrington was a conservation area.

·        The negatives of the continuation of the quarry far outweighed the benefits and much tighter conditions would be required should the applications be approved.

·        The suggested working hours were beyond what could be tolerated by the local community.

Councillor Dean Wise the Vice-Chair of Settrington Parish Council addressed the Committee highlighting the following.

·        The conditions should be amended to reflect the nuisance caused to the local community.

·        He outlined preferred conditions for the routing of HGVs, the number of vehicles per day in and out of the quarry avoiding school times, working time restrictions. • Insist that details are provided in relation to when blasting and extractions were to take place.

·        Some noise could be accepted but details of when that was to occur, within the suggested revised working times, would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 78.

Considered

The report of the Assistant Director Planning – Community Development Service requesting Members to determine an application for removal of condition No.7 of Planning Permission Ref. C8/2009/1066/CPO to allow blasting in the southern extension area on land to the south of existing quarry, Jackdaw Crag Quarry, Moor Lane, Sutton, Tadcaster, LS24 9BE.

The application was subject to objections having been raised primarily on the grounds of disturbance to amenity due to blasting and was, therefore, reported to the Committee for determination.

Prior to the consideration of the report the Committee’s Legal Representative highlighted a communication received overnight from the legal representatives representing Sam Smiths Brewery objecting to the recommendation for approval. He stated that this was a lengthy and complex objection that would require more time to determine the implications to the application of the issues raised. He suggested therefore that the application be deferred to allow this to take place.

Resolved

That that the application be DEFERRED for further consideration at a subsequent meeting of the Committee to allow more time to determine the implications to the application of the issues raised in the submission by the legal representatives of Sam Smiths Brewery.

There was none.