Agenda item

Any other items which the Chair agrees should be considered as a matter of urgency because of special circumstances.

The Solicitor to the Committee updated Members with regard to application ZA23/25403/FUL for a residential development at land off Marton Road, Gargrave.  The application was considered by Members in June 2024 and determination was deferred pending additional information on the impact on the highways and highways safety issues.  The application was brought back to Members with the additional information on 6^th August 2024 and the Committee voted to grant planning permission subject to conditions and a S.106 Agreement.

Subsequently, many objections had been received by Councillors, the Chief Executive, the Director and MP.  A series of formal complaints from a number of individuals and Gargrave Parish Council had gone through North Yorkshire Council’s  multi-stage corporate complaints procedure.

The complaints were essentially two-fold.  The Planning policy position which informed the decision started with the lowest tier of the planning policy ladder, that being the Gargrave Neighbourhood Plan which had allocated the site for housing in 2019.  This was then approved by the former Craven District Council and put into the Craven Local Plan.  However, there had been an apparent discrepancy in the Gargrave Neighbourhood Plan between the version of the plan prepared by the parish and their consultant and that submitted for referendum and the version presented for adoption by the former Craven District Council.

Although both versions allocated the site for housing, specifically the difference was the referendum version had a number of criteria including one relating to the access into the site and it stated that the access should be through the existing Walton Road.  The proposal, which cam forward for approval by Craven District Council Members had a different access arrangement. What had been suggested to North Yorkshire Council was that because of the discrepancy in the Neighbourhood Plan the Council should be precluded from issuing the planning permission and also that North Yorkshire Council should correct that issue in the Neighbourhood Plan. 

The Solicitor stated that the decision notice had not been issued thus far because of the time taken negotiating the S.106 agreement. Relevant officers, planners and legal colleagues concluded that the decision notice could be issued as there was no conflict of interest between the Neighbourhood Local Plan and the Craven Local Plan in that both allocated the site for housing.  Moreover, the Craven Local Plan superseded the Neighbourhood Plan, taking priority and the no criteria attached to that in terms of arrangements.  The view was, therefore, that the Council should issue the planning permission which it was obliged to do.  The second point about correcting the discrepancy in the Neighbourhood Plan and the criteria attached to that allocation, could not be done by North Yorkshire Council.  The National Planning Policy guidance provided the mechanisms for changing Neighbourhood Plans and the only party that was able to change or initiate that process was Gargrave Parish Council.  North Yorkshire Council could support the parish in that process but could not do it itself.

A second opinion had been sought from a barrister at Kings Chambers, who had confirmed that the Council’s officers’ assessment was correct.  Therefore, it was proposed to issue the planning permission as per the recommendation, notwithstanding all the activities that had occurred since.  Should Gargrave Parish Council wish to revisit the Neighbourhood Plan for whatever reason, then North Yorkshire Council could help them in doing that.

The Chair asked for clarity in relation to the Craven Local Plan, specifically, was the entrance to the site shown when the land was allocated.  The solicitor gave reassurance that no particular route into the site had been specified.  Confirmation was also given that Members did not act ultra vires or reached an incorrect decision based on the information before them.

On another planning matter, a member asked for an update on a planning permission granted by the Committee on a site at the old sawmill, Gargrave which had since been referred to the Secretary of State. Officers present at the meeting had no information but agreed to provide an update at the next Chair and Vice-Chairs meeting so they could, in turn, update Members of the Committee.