Item 6

Planning Committee 4 September 2018

Outline Application with All Matters Reserved Except Access for 35 Dwellings including Public Open Space and Associated Infrastructure (As Amended, 9th May 2018)

Rose Villa Farm Wells Lane Barton Richmond North Yorkshire DL10 6LU

Report of the Planning and Community Development Manager Ward = Barton

Key Decision = N

Date Application Received:

23 November 2017 Target Date for Decision:

22 February 2018

Applicant: Mrs Helen Boston

Agent (where applicable): Mrs Helen Boston

View Application Documents, Consultation Responses, Representations Received and Other Background Papers Online:

https://planning.richmondshire.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=OZROQ9NAJOT00

1.0 Purpose of the Report and Decisions Sought

1.1 Members are asked to consider the implications of the recent change in national policy (the updated National Planning Policy Framework – July 2018) as it relates to application 17/00829/OUT.

2.0 Background to the Proposal

2.1 Members will recall that this outline application was considered at the 3 July 2018 Planning Committee where Members resolved to approve planning permission for 35 dwellings (including Public Open Space and associated infrastructure) in accordance with the recommendation and recommended planning conditions at 9.1 and 9.2 of the Officer’s report.

7

2.2 The granting of planning permission was subject to the completion of a Section 106 agreement providing for 30 per cent affordable housing provision and the provision of 203 square metres of recreation/play facilities.

2.3 On Tuesday 24 July 2018, the Government published the revised version of the National Planning Policy Framework that came into immediate effect. This replaced the previous version of the NPPF that was a material consideration in the Officer’s recommendation and the Planning Committee’s decision to grant conditional planning permission. Paragraph 4.2 of the Officer’s Report made reference to the following specific sections of the previous NPPF that were considered of particular relevance to the application:

• Promoting Sustainable Transport• Delivering a Wide Choice of High Quality Homes• Requiring Good Design• Promoting Healthy Communities• Meeting the Challenge of Climate Change, Flooding and Coastal Change• Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment

2.4 Having considered the amended application in relation to the previous NPPF (as well as Local Plan policy), paragraph 8.14 of the Officer’s report concluded that the development would achieve the policy objectives of the NPPF (as well as according with the relevant policies of the Development Plan).

3.0 Consideration of the Relevant Changes to the NPPF

3.1 The following specific sections of the new NPPF (July 2018) are considered to be of particular relevance to the consideration of this application:

• Achieving Sustainable Development• Delivering a Sufficient Supply of Homes• Promoting Healthy and Safe Communities• Promoting Sustainable Transport• Making Effective Use of Land• Achieving Well-Designed Places• Meeting the Challenge of Climate Change, Flooding and Coastal Change• Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment

3.2 Whilst most of the revised NPPF (and above sections in particular) remain largely unaltered in their objectives and expectations for new development, below are some of the more significant and relevant changes to the NPPF to be considered when determining this outline planning application:

Sustainable Development Section 2 of the revised NPPF reaffirms that the purpose of the planning system is to achieve sustainable development. There are no substantive changes in this regard between the previous and revised NPPF.

Viability Issues The revised NPPF now puts the burden on applicants “to demonstrate whether particular circumstances justify the need for a viability assessment at the application stage” and puts the onus on the decision-maker to decide what weight should be given to the viability assessment “having regard to all the circumstances in the

8

case”. (para 57) The issue of viability has not been an important factor in the consideration of this application as the applicant has agreed to provide the full 30 per cent affordable housing provision as well as the requisite requirement for open space/play facilities based on the size of the development and its location. The applicant has agreed to enter into a Section 106 agreement to secure these elements prior to planning permission being issued.

Delivering a Sufficient Supply of Homes Paragraph 63 of the revised NPPF clarifies that provision for affordable housing

should not be sought for residential developments that are not major developments (i.e. 10 dwellings or more), although in designated rural areas policies may set a lower threshold (5 units or fewer). As a “major” development, the requirements for affordable housing provision (through Policy CP6 of the Local Plan) would still apply.

Housing Delivery The new standardised methodology for assessing housing need (i.e. housing

numbers) is reflected in the revised NPPF, although at the present time no significant amendments have been made to the methodology as yet (or to the Housing Delivery Test) that would result in a need to reconsider the appropriateness of housing numbers either for this individual site or cumulatively, taking into consideration the proposed development at The Ashes Farm site also located in Barton. The relevant household projections are due to be released in September at which point the Government will consult on any specific details of any change after that time.

Design and Achieving Well-Designed Places Section 12 of the revised NPPF (Achieving Well-Designed Places) places greater

emphasis on high quality design and reaffirms that “great weight” should be given to outstanding or innovative designs which promote high levels of sustainability, or help raise the standard of design more generally in an area, so long as they fit in with the overall form and layout of their surroundings (para. 131) As a reserved matter, detailed design (and landscaping) would be considered once an approval of reserved matters application is submitted, however there is no reason at this stage to conclude that high quality design and landscaping for the site cannot be achieved.

4.0 Conclusions and Recommendation 8.1 Having considered the changes in the revised NPPF (July 2018) that are relevant to

the consideration of this outline planning application, it is recommended that Members reaffirm the previous resolution (Minute P15/18 refers) made on 4 July 2018 to approve conditional outline planning permission subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement providing for affordable housing and recreation/play facilities.

10.0 Further Information File Reference: 17/00829/OUT Appendices: Appendix 1: Copy of the Officer’s Report (for the 3 July Planning Committee Meeting)

9

Contact Officer: Ian Nesbit Email/Telephone: ian.nesbit@richmondshire.gov.uk

01748 901126

10

Planning Committee 3 July 2018

Outline Application with All Matters Reserved Except Access for 35 Dwellings including Public Open Space and Associated Infrastructure (As Amended, 9th May 2018)

Rose Villa Farm Wells Lane Barton Richmond North Yorkshire DL10 6LU

Report of the Planning and Community Development Manager Barton

Key Decision = N

Date Application Received:

23 November 2017 Target Date for Decision:

22 February 2018

Applicant: Mrs Helen Boston

Agent (where applicable): Mrs Helen Boston

View Application Documents, Consultation Responses, Representations Received and Other Background Papers Online:

http://https://planning.richmondshire.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?keyVal=OZROQ9NAJOT00&activeTab=summary

1.0 Purpose of the Report and Decisions Sought

1.1 To set out details of the proposal, a description of the site and its surroundings, a summary of planning policy and planning history, details of views expressed by consultees, a summary of the relevant planning issues and a recommendation to assist the Committee in considering and determining this application for planning permission.

1.2 The LPA has considered whether there is a need for an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the proposed development and determined that an EIA is not required.

2.0 Background and Details of the Proposal

2.1 This amended application is seeking outline planning permission for a residential development of 35 dwellings with associated works on the site of Rose Villa Farm,

Appendix 1

11

Barton. All matters are reserved with the exception of the vehicle access, details of which have been provided within this application.

2.2 Since the application was submitted, there have been two significant amendments to the scheme that have resulted in a decrease in the size of the application site from 4.8 hectares to 2.42 hectares and a reduction in the number of residential units from 50 to 35. An indicative layout plan has been submitted as part of the latest amendments to the scheme showing the 35 plots as well as areas of public open space. A written commitment has also been made by the agent within the amended Design and Access Statement to meet the 30% affordable housing provision (a 15% affordable housing provision had originally been proposed for the 50 unit scheme). A copy of the indicative layout plan is provided at Appendix 1.

2.3 The mix of housing within the proposed development is something that would be determined as part of a subsequent reserved matters submission, but it is stated within the Design and Access Statement (Addendum) that the scheme would provide a mix of properties of different types, sizes and tenures, capable of meeting the Local Plan policy requirements. The application is required to meet policy requirements for a total of 203 square metres of open space provision (on or off site as a contribution, as appropriate).

2.4 The application is supported by the following documents:

• Concept Masterplan – 35 Units (indicative)• Planning Statement – Addendum (9th May)• Design and Access Statement – Addendum (9th May 2018)• Revised Flood Risk Assessment (March 2018)• Phase 1 Geo-Environmental Desk Study• Site Access Arrangement (Figure 4)• Transport Statement• Existing Site Plan• Arboricultural Report• Statement of Community Involvement• Ecological Impact Assessment• Viability Appraisal Information (Confidential)

Although not an additional planning document per se, a subsequent statement has been submitted by the agent (dated 12th June 2018), emphasising the potential public benefits resulting from the scheme ceasing agricultural activities at Rose Villa Farm as well as clarifying the nature and occurrence of farming activities that currently take place on the farm.

The revised (addendum) Design and Access Statement and (addendum) Planning Statement both provide an overview of the main aspects of the proposal and the aforementioned Design and Access Statement is attached for ease of reference at Appendix 2 of this report. All non-confidential original and revised documents are available to view as required through the ‘Public Access’ area of the Council’s web site using the link at the beginning of this report.

Appendix 1

12

3.0 Description of the Site and Surroundings

3.1 Rose Villa Farm is located towards the eastern end of the village of Barton, on the

south side of the road that leads through Barton to Darlington. The farm is located on the east side of Wells Lane. The former King William IV Public House building (now converted to a single dwelling) is situated between the application site and Silver Street to the north. The farm group includes a number of buildings, including cattle sheds, and a large slurry tank. A relatively new two storey farm house has been built close to the western boundary of the site which is accessed via Wells Lane.

3.2 To the north side of Silver Street there are residential properties forming East View,

whilst on the west side of Wells Lane is Wells Green, a housing development with properties facing onto Wells Lane with windows overlooking the farm complex. Beyond the farm to the south and east is open agricultural grazing land defined by boundary hedges and trees.

4.0 Planning Policies Richmondshire Local Plan 2012/2028 Core Strategy 4.1 The following policies of the Local Plan Core Strategy are relevant in considering

this application:

SP1: Sub Areas SP2: Settlement Hierarchy SP3: Rural Sustainability SP4: Scale and Distribution of Housing Development North Richmondshire Spatial Strategy CP1: Planning Positively CP2: Responding to Climate Change CP3: Achieving Sustainable Development CP4: Supporting Sites for Development (with reference to Saved Policy 23 of the Local Plan 2001) CP5: Providing a Housing Mix CP6: Providing Affordable Housing CP11: Supporting Community, Cultural and Recreation Assets

Appendix 1

13

CP12: Conserving and Enhancing Environmental and Historic Assets CP13: Promoting High Quality Design CP14: Providing and Delivering Infrastructure

National Planning Policy Framework 4.2 As a means of achieving sustainable development and alongside the presumption

in favour of sustainable development proposals that meet the twelve core planning principles set out in the National Planning Policy Framework, the following specific sections of the document are relevant in considering this proposal:

• Promoting Sustainable Transport • Delivering a Wide Choice of High Quality Homes • Requiring Good Design • Promoting Healthy Communities • Meeting the Challenge of Climate Change, Flooding and Coastal Change • Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment

5.0 Planning History 5.1 There is a relatively extensive recent planning history related to the Rose Villa Farm

site. The farm underwent a significant overhaul in 2004/5 when the dairy farm was modernised and the existing diary herd was increased from 300 to 400 head of cattle. This is reflected in the following planning applications related to the farmstead from 2004 onwards:

• Full planning permission for the erection of an agricultural dairy building to

accommodate a milking parlour/dairy and collecting yard was granted in November, 2004 (1/93/141C/FULL)

• Full planning permission for erection of an agricultural dairy housing building

was granted in November, 2004 (1/93/141D/FULL)

• Full planning permission for erection of a circular concrete panelled slurry store was granted in November, 2004 (1/93/141E/FULL)

• A full planning application for erection of molasses storage tank (agricultural

feed). Was withdrawn in November, 2008 (1/93/141F/FULL) A subsequent planning application for a revised scheme for a molasses storage tank for agricultural livestock feed was submitted and then approved in September, 2009 (1/93/141G/FULL)

5.2 Outline planning permission for the erection of an agricultural worker’s dwelling was

granted planning permission in January, 2011 (1/93/141H/OUT) A related “approval of reserved matters” application for the erection of the new farmhouse was granted in December, 2012 (12/00711/AORM)

5.3 Planning permission for the installation of 100kw microgenerator anaerobic

digestion (AD) plant was approved in July, 2014 (13/00690/FULL), although the permission has now expired without the digestion plant having been installed.

5.4 Planning permission for the erection of an agricultural livestock building was

approved in April, 2015 (14/00739/FULL). A discharge of conditions application has

Appendix 1

14

recently been submitted seeking to discharge conditions 4, 5, 6 and 8. The application is still under consideration by the District Council.

5.5 This application was considered by the Planning Committee on 1st May, 2018

following a site visit, after which the latest amendments to the scheme were submitted. The amended scheme considered by the Planning Committee was at this stage proposing 40 units. In accordance with the revised Officer recommendation, the Planning Committee voted to defer making a decision on the application to allow appropriate time for all additional comments and reconsultation responses received after the publication of the Planning Committee agenda to be fully taken into account. These comments included potential legal issues raised on behalf of the applicants of The Ashes Farm application (also on the same agenda) in relation to several technical, procedural and information related matters that would require further investigation by Officers.

6.0 Consultations Undertaken and Representations Received 6.1 As referred to in section 2 above, the scheme has been materially amended twice

during the course of its consideration and accordingly two re-consultation exercises have taken place. Consultees were advised that previous comments would be retained on file, but comments should be resubmitted in relation to the amended proposals, although earlier comments would be taken into account where still relevant to the latest amended scheme. Members may still review the earlier comments along with the new comments in full by using the link at the beginning of this report.

6.2 Parish Council: Have considered the latest amendments to the scheme, the Parish

Council have confirmed that their original concerns regarding the application remain, especially the issues raised in relation to the proposed site access.

The Parish Council’s previous comments are as follows:

• Barton is considered to be at risk of flooding from heavy rain/surface water

and the Parish Council has been informed that insurance companies are refusing to cover certain properties in Barton due to flood risk.

• The water treatment works (at Barton) is in need of upgrading and the Parish Council is sceptical about the current water treatment works being able to cope with the addition of multiple properties.

• Vehicle access to the development site via Wells Lane is a concern as it would mean an marked increase in traffic in and out of Wells Lane onto Silver Street or going along alternative routes (via the back lanes towards Middleton Tyas that are already not in the best of condition with poor drainage)

• It is important that the development takes the best advantage of providing truly affordable housing to enable young people (who wish to do so) and to ensure the sustainability of the local school and our other assets such as the village shop/post office, pub and village hall.

• There is a danger that with a large increase in housing numbers that Barton will lose its identity as a village and will become another “commuter town” that the increased traffic, etc. that this would entail.

• Concerns have been expressed regarding whether the local school could cope with the additional pupils and thy also believe that the doctors surgery

Appendix 1

15

(at Aldbrough St. John) would also struggle to cope with the additional numbers.

• They believe the development far exceeds what the village can support without considerable erosion of the village’s green spaces.

6.3 North Yorkshire Highways: No response has yet been received from the Highway

Authority in relation to the latest amended scheme for 35 units (any response will be reported to Members at the Planning Committee), although having been consulted on the proposed development as originally submitted, the Highway Authority have raised no objections subject to planning conditions being imposed in the event of permission being granted to require: submission and approval of details of all on-site and off-site highway construction works (including vehicular and pedestrian site accesses and vehicular parking); submission and approval of details of the method and means of surface water disposal; details of measures to prevent mud, dirt and grit entering the highway; details of on-site construction parking and material compounds; provision of visibility splays for a distance of 90 metres along both channels of the major road; the construction traffic restrictions; the submission of a highway condition survey; and restrictions relating to the conversion of garages into habitable rooms.

6.4 North Yorkshire Footpaths: No response received. 6.5 Richmondshire Ramblers: No response received. 6.6 Northumbrian Water: Having considered the latest amended scheme,

Northumbrian Water refer to their comments made in December 2017 in relation to the application as originally submitted and have confirmed that they have no additional comments to make. Northumbrian Water’s previous comments in relation to the application as originally submitted are as follows:

With regard to foul drainage, the adjacent sewer network does not have capacity to

accommodate additional flows (produced by the proposed development) at the present time. However, upon receiving certainty that the development is to proceed (following the grant of planning permission), Northumbrian Water would carry out further assessment work to inform subsequent investment to enable a foul drainage strategy to be agreed for the proposed development site. In order to enable a suitable foul drainage strategy to be agreed, Northumbrian Water recommend a planning condition stating that the development shall not commence until a detailed scheme for the disposal of foul water from the development has been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with Northumbrian Water. In relation to surface water, Northumbrian Water have no issues to raise provided the disposal of surface water is undertaken in accordance with the Flood Risk assessment, i.e. the discharge of surface water to the watercourse.

Having made Northumbrian Water aware of consultation responses raising

concerns to the potential for surface water flows discharging into the public sewerage network, Northumbrian Water were able to confirm that they are satisfied that their previous comments remain valid as the scheme proposes that only domestic foul flows will discharge to the existing public sewerage system whilst the surface water will discharge to the watercourse. If the surface water flows are discharged directly to Barton Beck, the risks of flooding and pollution would no longer apply.

Appendix 1

16

6.7 North Yorkshire Flood Risk Management: The relevant amended documents

(submitted as part of the latest proposed amendments to the scheme) demonstrate a reasonable approach to the management of surface water on the site. Flood Risk Management therefore have no amendments to make in respect to their previous consultation responses on the application. If planning permission is granted, planning conditions are recommended requiring the prior approval of detailed foul and surface water drainage scheme for the site based on sustainable drainage principles and incorporating any phasing of the scheme. Conditions would require the drainage shceme to provide details of the following:

• Details of flow run-off rates to a maximum flowrate of 42.4 litres per second

(for up to a 1-in-100 year event); • The provision of storage to accommodate a minimum 1-in-100 year event

plus climate change critical storm event • Details of the maintenance and management regime for the proposed

storage facility and drainage scheme more generally • The provision of an Exceedance Flow Plan for situations where SuDS

features fail or are exceeded 6.8 North Yorkshire Education: Having considered the latest amendments to the

scheme, North Yorkshire Education have confirmed that they have no additional comments to make in additional to those previously made in relation to the application. North Yorkshire Education’s previous comments (in relation to both the 50 unit and 40 unit schemes) was that no financial contribution towards primary and secondary school facilities was required from the development.

6.9 Primary Care Group: No response received. 6.10 North Yorkshire Police: Having considered the latest amendments, North

Yorkshire Police refer to the comments they made in relation to the application as originally submitted (see below), although they have made the following observations in relation to the latest layout plan:

• The revised layout continues to have areas of Public Open Space location

adjacent to the rear gardens of properties and there is a lack of overlooking from nearby dwellings. This creates issues as previously highlighted, including:

a) Removing a sense of guardianship b) Providing an opportunity for offenders to gain access to back gardens

unseen c) Leave the rear of properties vulnerable to criminal attack d) Leave boundary treatments susceptible to damage. e) Create opportunities for conflict between residents and users of the Public

Open Space. North Yorkshire Police’s previous comments made in relation to the application as

originally submitted are as follows:

• Although the development site lies within an area of relatively low crime and disorder levels, the development has the potential to increase crime and disorder levels of the “designing out of crime” principles are not considered and implemented. In this regard, several observations and comments have been made in the Designing out Crime Report submitted as North Yorkshire Police’s

Appendix 1

17

consultation response, relating to design and layout; tenure; access and movement; public open space; ambiguous space; defensible space; boundary protection; car parking; cycle storage; lighting; landscaping and the construction phase of development.

• Should outline planning permission be granted, North Yorkshire Police have

recommended a planning condition requiring details to be submitted and approved of the crime prevention and mitigation measures to be incorporated into the development (addressing the potential crime and disorder issues raised in the Designing out Crime Report)

6.11 Environmental Health: Have considered the latest amendments to the scheme

and have confirmed that they have no additional comments to add to their previous responses. Environmental Health’s original comments were as follows:

Having considered the potential impact on amenity and the likelihood that the

proposed development will cause a nuisance, Environmental Health consider that the impact will be low. Environmental Health therefore have no objection to the proposals (in principle), however, they have made the following observations/recommendations:

Having reviewed the submitted Phase 1 Geo-Environmental Desk Study, dated November 2017, they note that the overall contamination risk from past use is considered to be low, although the study does identify potential pollution linkages and a potential risk to human health from soil contamination hazards that may be present in made ground beneath the farmyard part of the site and from asbestos containing materials present within farm buildings. A Phase 2 Geo-Environmental Risk Assessment is therefore recommended incorporating intrusive investigation with the aims of confirming the distribution of any made ground present and to quantitatively assess the presence and concentrations of potentially contaminative materials present within the deposits beneath the site. Although the Phase 1 Study does recommend further site investigating, Environmental Health would recommend that a wider investigation is undertaken taking into consideration a wider investigation site and the typical pollutants from the current farm use. It is recommended that the scope of the site investigation is agreed with the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of the works.

On this basis, planning conditions are recommended requiring an assessment of the risks posed by contamination (carried out in line with the Environment Agency’s Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination CLR11) to be submitted and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development, as well as a scheme for the remediation of any contaminated land. Another planning condition is recommended that if contamination is found or suspected at any time during development that was not previously identified, that all works shall cease and the LPA shall be notified in writing immediately with no further works being undertaken or the development occupied until an investigation and risk assessment carried out. Where remediation is necessary, a scheme for the remediation of any contamination shall be submitted and approved by the LPA before any further development occurs.

6.12 Yorkshire Wildlife Trust: No response has yet been received in relation to the

latest amended scheme for 35 units, although YWT have made the following comments/observations on the scheme (as previously amended) which are still

Appendix 1

18

considered to be relevant in relation to the amended application. Members will be updated as any additional comments at the Committee meeting:

• Swallows are using the buildings so a plan to provide nest opportunities for

swallows should be required and it could also be valuable to have swift nest sites.

• The mitigation and enhancement suggestions in the Naturally Wild ecology report should be conditioned, including a plan to show the position of bird and bat boxes.

• A low level lighting scheme should also be required. • If the building containing the bat roost is likely to be demolished a European

Protected Species Licence (EPSL) will be required. A condition to see the EPSL before development commences might also be appropriate, or updated information on the presence of bats provided if development does not take place before mid 2019.

6.13 CPRE North Yorkshire: Object to the amended proposals:

• The CPRE acknowledge that there is little opportunity for “infill” development within the village, and the open space in the village that is integral to the character of the village. However, The Ashes Farm development is better located in an area immediately adjacent to existing residential development whilst The Ashes Farm is already in the process of being re-located away from the village.

• CPRE are concerned that residential development in this location would alter the character of the settlement and introduce a residential form of development in a location where it was previously resisted.

• The presence of agricultural buildings is typical of a rural location and should not be used as rationale to permit residential development beyond the Development Limits of Barton.

• The granting of planning permission for both the Rose Villa Farm and The Ashes Farm sites would lead to over-development in the village, not in conformity with the expectations of the Local Plan and would lead to excessive strain on existing services.

• CPRE would expect the developer’s commitment to provide 30% affordable housing to actually be provided.

6.14 Local Residents: Summary of comments received in relation to the latest amended

application as follows (where comments made are material planning considerations) – all documents and full details can be viewed using the link at the beginning of this report:

Summary of comments in support of the latest amended application (3

representations) • It would allow the existing farm (including the farm herd and associated plant

and machinery) to move out of the village. This relocation would allow the business to grow in order to maintain efficiency and competition in the dairy sector.

• The relocation would remove associated (farm-related) traffic and potential conflicts of interest within the village environment.

• The proposed removal of the current dairy operation could be readily achieved within the timescale of any planning permission granted.

Appendix 1

19

• The north-west of the village is still subject to smells from farm activities

which include silage and manure. • Traffic flows along Church Lane from this active farm can occur several time

per hour when silage making or slurry lagoon emptying is taking place. These activities continue late into the evening and over several days when they are being undertaken.

• The proposed development would lie to the south of the main road through the village and it is not necessary for the residents to cross this busy road in order to get to the shop, play field equipment or the school. There is a footpath from the farm to all these facilities making it much safer for the residents to access the village and its facilities.

• The development is wholly on the existing farm footprint consistent with good practice without extending the village or using agricultural fields.

• This proposed development is on the same side of the road as the school and village play area which are only yards away, and further down on the same side are the shop and Village Hall where many activities take place. These can all be accessed safely on existing good wide footpaths without the need to cross “busy” Silver Street and potentially affect the safety of children.

Summary of comments raising concerns/objections to the latest amended application (2 representations)

• The proposals will create an excessive number of dwellings in a “dense urban style” that would swamp the village.

• It would be preferable to build houses on brownfield sites, thus improving the overall appearance of the village and in keeping with the size and character of the village.

• The sewage infrastructure serving the village is at maximum capacity and is in danger of overflowing.

• The site access is to be sited adjacent to the existing children’s play park and could provide a hazard as users park cars along Wells Lane.

• The development – and the numerous other large developments in close proximity to Barton – are not necessary and would have a very considerable and detrimental effect on the village.

• The number of houses proposed , on a single development, is still too large for a village of the size of Barton

Issues raised by local residents in relation to the earlier schemes that remain relevant to the current application include concerns about sewerage infrastructure capacity; vehicle access concerns onto Wells Lane; the impact on other services and infrastructure in the village; alternative ‘Brownfield’ sites in the village would be preferable.

6.16 Other: A detailed letter of objection (dated 15th June 2018) has been received on

behalf of the applicants of The Ashes Farm application (ref. 17/00901/OUT) The issues raised are summarised below:

• Relocation of the farm business. It is still unclear whether the existing farm business will be relocated, although it is noted that the previous reference to “relocation” has been omitted form the amended description. If the farm is not to be relocated, then there will be a loss of employment and an adverse impact on the local economy.

• Relocation of the farm business (2) It the farm is to be relocated, then there would be a considerable cost to the establishment of a new farm site. If

Appendix 1

20

planning permission is granted and the relocation turns out to be unviable or undeliverable this would have a wider impact on the Council’s delivery of new homes in the North Richmondshire sub area.

• Relocation of the farm business (3) The environmental impacts of relocating the farm business would need to be weighed into the planning balance.

• Relocation of the farm business (4) Uncertainty over the potential relocation of the existing farm might affect the deliverability of the site coming forward for development.

• Relocation of the farm business (5) Unlike his client’s site that is already partly relocated, the redevelopment of Rose Villa Farm would be unsustainable.

• Environmental Impacts/Nuisance. Any nuisances experienced by residents in the vicinity of the farm could have been better mitigated with practical measures to reduce odours and problems of queuing traffic, including implementing a previous permission for a digester on the farm. The applicant is relying on alleged nuisances to bolster the planning merits of the scheme many of which are common to most farms operating in a village location (including their client’s farm) and should therefore be given limited weight in the planning balance. Any proposed relocation of the farm may not necessarily result in the removal of the nuisance depending on where it is relocated.

• Landscape Assessment. Despite the reduction in unit numbers, there is a very real possibility of significant landscape effects as a result of the location of the site on the edge of the village with open countryside on three sides. No “robust” Landscape Assessment has been submitted.

• Greenfield/Brownfield Land. Unlike his client’s site (which is partly brownfield), the Rose Villa Farm site is entirely greenfield land and is therefore more sustainable and consistent with Local Plan and national planning policy.

• Traffic Movements. Given that the applicant would retain agricultural fields adjacent to the site, it is not clear that any relocation of the farm would ease traffic movements.

• Site Layout (1) The indicative layout shows “hard edges” adjacent to the north and south boundaries with no landscaping shown. The provision of open space would only serve to separate the development from existing development on Wells Lane and would not respect the existing village envelope and built edge of the village, appearing as “an unnatural incursion” into open countryside on the edge of the village without any “soft transition” changing the existing character of the village edge.

• Site Layout (2) The proposed SuDs pond appears small for the requirements of the development proposed. If the pond therefore needs to be provided outside of the site, then this could cast further doubt on delivery. Furthermore, there is little space within the development for an adequate amount of landscaping.

• Drainage. There is an inadequate offset distance shown on the illustrative site layout plan between the pumping station and the building in plot 11, whilst the need for a mechanical would be less sustainable than a gravity-based foul system (as proposed in his client’s application.

• Space Standards. The indicative site layout shows a relatively dense form of development (outside of the areas of open space) Some dwellings on the layout appear small in size, with some of the smaller units appearing to be below national space standards.

Appendix 1

21

• Viability and Delivery. Given that the amended scheme for Rose Villa Farm

has reduced the number of units to 35 and is now proposing the full affordable housing contribution (where previously it was stated that there were viability issues in relation to reduced unit numbers and the provision of the full 30% affordable housing contribution), the viability of the scheme should be called into question.

6.16 The amended proposals have been further publicised by a site notice and newspaper advertisement and the period for representations to be made has now expired. All consultee comments and representations received can be viewed in full by using the link at the beginning of this report.

7.0 Planning Issues Policy Considerations 7.1 The full list of relevant policies is set out in Section 4 above. The key policy

requirements of the Local Plan Core Strategy that have the greatest bearing on the consideration of this application are policies CP4 (Supporting Sites for Development), CP5 (Providing a Housing Mix) and CP6 (Providing Affordable Housing) in pursuance of the objectives of Spatial Principles SP2, SP4 and the North Richmondshire Spatial Strategy. Barton (along with Middleton Tyas and Melsonby) is one of three Primary Service Villages in the North Richmondshire sub area which together are expected to deliver at least 105 houses over the Plan period and the scale of development proposed in this scheme would assist in delivering those objectives

7.2 Policy CP4 supports development that is of a scale and nature appropriate to

secure the sustainability of settlements in the defined settlement hierarchy and sites which are located adjacent to the defined “development limits” of the settlement. The site adjoins the north-western ‘Development Limits’ of the village as defined by the Local Plan and the proposal meets other expectations of Policy CP4 in terms of the scale of development in relation to the existing settlement along with its accessibility and relationship to existing facilities. However, consideration must also be given to the capacity of existing infrastructure and to ensure that the proposal does not conflict with the requirements of other core policies. This site lies within a part of the Plan Area where Policy CP6 of the Core Strategy sets a target figure of up to 30% affordable housing whilst Policy CP5 expects new housing proposals to take account of local housing requirements across all sectors of the community in terms of size, type, tenure, accessibility and adaptability.

7.3 Other policy considerations of the Local Plan Core Strategy that need to be noted at

this point are:

• taking a positive approach that reflects the presumption in favour of sustainable development contained in the National Planning Policy Framework […] working proactively with applicants to find solutions which mean that proposals can be approved wherever possible (Policy CP1).

• new residential development of more than 10 dwellings expected to submit an energy statement showing consideration of opportunities to deliver carbon savings in excess of Building Regulation requirements and to demonstrate that carbon savings have been maximised by incorporating these opportunities into the design (Policy CP2).

• supporting sustainable development which promotes […] the efficient use of land and infrastructure […] the health, economic and social well-being,

Appendix 1

22

amenity and safety of the population […] the distinctiveness, character, townscape and setting of settlements […] encouraging the use of previously developed land in preference to greenfield sites […] addressing any issues of land contamination or land stability arising from past uses and activities […] and development in locations which, as far as possible, minimises the need to travel (Policy CP3).

• supporting proposals that help create, protect, retain or enhance community, cultural and recreational assets […] ensuring the provision of sufficient quality recreation assets, including formal and informal, equipped and unequipped areas for open space and links to Public Rights of Way (Policy CP11).

• supporting development where it conserves and enhances the significance of the plan area’s natural and man-made, designated and undesignated assets (CP12).

• promoting high quality design and landscaping in all new developments (Policy CP13).

• providing, or enabling the provision of, the infrastructure made necessary by the development. Where it cannot be provided directly, developer contributions are required (Policy CP14).

Location and Housing Land Requirements 7.4 The Local Plan (‘Development Plan’) has specific policies relating to the appropriate

scale and distribution of housing development across the plan area in order to deliver the most sustainable development strategy. The Local Plan is “up to date” having been recently adopted in December 2014 and found to be sound and in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). The NPPF is a material consideration and it emphasises the importance of the statutory “plan-led” system and confirms that applications for planning permission should be determined in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

7.5 Spatial Principles SP1, SP2 and SP4 of the Local Plan together set out the

settlement hierarchy and housing delivery strategy across the various settlements in the plan area. Barton is a ‘Primary Service Village’ selected on the basis (inter alia) of having potential for some further development with relatively good access to local services. The Local Plan sets targets for new housing development within each sub-area and at each level within the settlement hierarchy. The target is based on the Plan’s objectively assessed housing need. Development is prioritised in locations close to existing facilities and infrastructure subject to its feasibility in terms of a range of constraints, infrastructure capacities, the availability of developable land and its consequences in terms of the local environmental impact of development. The amount and distribution of development for Primary Service Villages such as Barton is based on providing an appropriate scale of development to meet local needs and support the continued delivery of local services, such as primary schools and shops.

7.6 Spatial Principle SP4 is very clear in not only setting an overall amount of new

homes to be completed each year during the plan period, but crucially also stipulating that it will be (emphasis applied) distributed between the sub areas and settlement hierarchy according to a specific level of growth (105 dwellings between the aforementioned three North Richmondshire Primary Service Villages). The key objective of Policy CP4 is to support “development of a scale and nature appropriate to secure the sustainability of each settlement in the hierarchy”. Proposals should also “reflect and deliver the strategy for future development in the

Appendix 1

23

plan area in terms of the scale and distribution of development defined in the Core Strategy”. The policy objective is, therefore, to direct development at both a strategic and local level to the most suitable and sustainable locations.

7.7 The Local Plan is underpinned by an aspiration to ensure that communities have a

better balance of jobs, services, facilities and homes in order to achieve a sustainable pattern of development. This strategy relies on the delivery of the appropriate scale and location of development across the hierarchy, as well as between and within individual settlements in that hierarchy. To date, there are two major residential developments within the other two North Richmondshire Primary Service Villages of Melsonby and Middleton Tyas that are under consideration by the District Council. The site at Melsonby (ref. 15/00721/FULL) is subject to long-standing, but ongoing negotiations and would provide 45 new dwellings, whilst outline planning permission for 35 dwellings in Middleton Tyas was approved in October, 2015 (ref. 14/00779/OUT) An approval of reserved matters application has been submitted to the LPA in relation to this outline application. This would account for 80 dwellings which means that a scheme or schemes of above 35 units would substantially exceed the current housing target for the NRSA, even without including housing that has already been delivered and/or planning permissions on smaller (i.e. minor) sites.

7.8 It has to be recognised that neither the overall housing requirement for the Plan

Area or the distribution of that development to specific settlements such as Barton represents an absolute ceiling, but there is no evidence to suggest that the targets are inappropriate or that there are reasons to exceed those targets in any significant way. To do so in such circumstances, would undermine the proper delivery of the plan-led strategy unless other material considerations indicated otherwise.

7.9 This particular application must, of course, be considered on its own merits but

there is a further application for significant new housing (application reference 17/00901/OUT) that would also see 35 dwellings provided in the village of Barton which is also currently under consideration. Having regard to the above, it would be inappropriate to consider either application without some regard to the other as a material consideration, because if permission were to be granted to both schemes in isolation they would significantly exceed the planned level of sustainable growth for the village in a way that would be disproportionate to the settlement size and conflict with the proper scale and distribution of housing development in this part of the Local Plan area.

7.10 The National Planning Policy Framework places great emphasis on maintaining a 5

year supply of land for housing (with an additional percentage added for previous under-delivery). Previous delivery has not met the anticipated targets, although the level of development over the last 18 to 24 months has started to bring the level of development back on target. The Council’s position is that a suitable five year land supply does currently exist in Richmondshire. With a suitable supply of land being available and with relevant policies for the supply of housing being neither absent, silent, or out of date for the purposes of the NPPF, the “tilted balance” is not applicable in the way that Local Plan policies need to be applied. The need to maintain a five year land supply is, of course, an on-going requirement and this site would, in itself, make a positive contribution to local housing land supply.

7.11 The agricultural site is ‘greenfield’ and not considered a previously developed

‘brownfield’ site. The site has been previously identified within the Council’s land supply as a potentially suitable site for development.

Appendix 1

24

7.12 The Local Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework give preference to

‘brownfield’ sites, but there are no suitable such sites of any significant size in or around Barton (other than those already subject to planning application) that could deliver the amount of housing required by the Local Plan. As such, other potentially suitable ‘greenfield’ sites cannot reasonably be ruled out and this is recognised by Local Plan policies.

7.13 Local Plan and national planning policy requires the ‘best and most versatile’

agricultural land to be protected from development. The amended application site would predominantly restrict new development to the existing built up confines of the agricultural unit thus eliminating any material loss of undeveloped agricultural land. Notwithstanding this, having considered Natural England’s Agricultural Land Classification Map (for Yorkshire and The Humber) the map shows that the Rose Villa Farm site is grade 3 land which is “good to moderate”. The proposed amended scheme would therefore not be erected on the best or most versatile agricultural land and therefore can reasonably be considered as potentially suitable for development.

Housing Mix and the Provision of Affordable Housing 7.14 The Planning Statement (addendum) and Design and Access Statement

(addendum) both indicate that there would be a mix of property types and sizes brought forward at the reserved matters stage that would generally reflect the aspirations of Local Plan Policy CP5 in terms of the sizes and types of properties proposed. Developments are also expected to deliver an appropriate mix of tenures and an appropriate proportion of affordable housing. The target set by the Local Plan Core Strategy is for 30% of dwellings on new developments in this area to be affordable. It has been confirmed within the aforementioned documents that the scheme is able to provide the requisite proportion of affordable housing as part of this development. On-site affordable housing would be retained in perpetuity and secured through a Section 106 Agreement.

Accessibility and Local Services 7.15 As described in the Design and Access Statement (addendum) the site is relatively

well related to existing services and facilities with a pedestrian link to Silver Street and a bus stop located on Silver Street to the north of the site. On the opposite side of Wells Lane is Barton Primary School and play area. Elsewhere in the village, and within walking distance of the application site is a village shop, pub, village green, church and cricket pitch. The application site is therefore considered to be an appropriate location for new housing development and sustainable location for new development.

Flood Risk and Surface Water Drainage 7.16 A revised Flood Risk Assessment accompanying the application confirms that the

site lies within Flood Zone 1 and therefore is at low risk of flooding. Although it is acknowledged that the Rose Villa site experiences standing water issues in places, it is concluded that the proposed development would increase flood risk on or off the site. Based on an initial ground assessment, the site is considered to have little infiltration capacity and that an infiltration scheme for the disposal of surface water is not considered appropriate. The existing site currently discharges to a watercourse to the north-east of the site. The proposed drainage strategy proposed for the scheme is to retain this existing discharge point but to reduce the rate of discharge (to the watercourse) by 50%, i.e. 42.4 litres/second with the provision of storm water attenuation for any flows that exceed this restricted discharge rate. It is proposed that the aforementioned attenuation would be provided via a storage

Appendix 1

25

basin to be located adjacent to the eastern boundary of the site, with any additional attenuation provided through other means (e.g. swales, filter trenches and storage tanks) It is estimated that the capacity if attenuation storage would be 273 cubic metres (for the 1-in-30 year event) and 570 cubic metres (for 1-in-100 year event and a 40% provision for climate change and 10% for urban creep) respectively, although this is subject to detailed design. Any failure of the system would result in surface water running downhill away from the development and towards the existing watercourse. It is concluded within the assessment that the risk of flooding to the surrounding area will be reduced by the proposals. North Yorkshire Flood Risk Management have commented on the revised Flood Risk Assessment, and have raised no objections subject to conditions requiring the confirmation and prior approval (by planning condition) of specific details of the surface water scheme including flow run-off rates, an exceedance flow plan, surface water storage and details of the maintenance and management regime.

7.17 Concerns have been raised continuously throughout the course of this application

by both local residents and the Parish Council regarding the ability of the existing waste water sewage works to accommodate additional foul discharge flows. Although Northumbrian Water have stated in their consultation response that there is currently no capacity to accommodate the additional foul drainage requirements of the proposed development, they have not objected to the application stating that if planning permission is granted, additional capacity would be created. As the technical consultee on this matter, Northumbrian Water’s position on this matter has to be given significant material weight on this issue. No issues have been raised in relation to the provision of a water supply for the scheme. The agent of the Rose Villa Farm scheme has raised a potential issue identified on the indicative layout provided as part of the latest amendments to the scheme. He has stated that there appears to be an inadequate offset distance shown on the illustrative layout plan between the proposed site of the pumping station and the plot 11 dwelling, whilst the need for a mechanical would be less sustainable than a gravity-based foul system. The layout is indicative and the precise layout would be agreed at reserved matters stage. However, given the flexibility that is likely to be afforded within the scheme for the location and provision of on-site public open space (as off-site provision through the enhancement of existing play facilities is a realistic prospect), the necessary offset distances should be able to be achieved without adversely affecting the appearance of the scheme. In the same respect, any increase in the size of the on-site SuDS should also be able to be successfully accommodated in any formal layout agreed at reserved matters stage.

Transportation, Access and Highway Safety 7.18 The application as originally submitted has been supported by a Transport

Statement. Vehicle access to the site is proposed via Wells Lane. A number of concerns have been expressed by local residents regarding matters of highway safety due to the location of the vehicle access off Wells Lane. However, the Highway Authority as the expert consultee on such matters have been satisfied that the traffic generated by the development can be accommodated by the existing local road network and have raised no objections to the scheme as originally submitted - including the proposed access off Wells lane - subject to planning conditions. Although the Highway Authority have yet to formally comment on the latest revised scheme, it is unlikely that they would have any objections to what is a scheme for a reduced number of units with the access remaining in the same location, although clarification will be provided to Members at the Planning Committee meeting.

Appendix 1

26

Education Provision 7.19 County Council Education have confirmed that based on a scheme of 35 dwellings

(of units of 2 or more bedrooms) that there would be no requirements for developer contributions to be made towards the provision of primary of secondary school education facilities.

Open Space/Recreation Provision 7.20 Core Policy CP11 expects new development to include provision of sufficient quality

recreational facilities and, where on-site provision is not possible or appropriate, a contribution towards enhancing existing assets will be sought. The total policy requirement for a development of the scale proposed in the latest amended scheme for 35 units is 203 square metres, based on “Fields in Trust” standards. In the (addendum) Design and Access and Planning statements, the agent believes that the “Fields in Trust” standards can be accommodated on site, although the agent has also agreed to have discussion with the Parish Council regarding whether the open space provision would be better met by improving existing play facilities located close to the application site. Negotiations with the agent regarding the precise means of recreation and play provision for the amended scheme are on-going and Members will be updated of the conclusion of these discussions at the Committee meeting.

Landscape Impact 7.21 No formal Landscape Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) has been submitted,

although an indicative masterplan showing an indicative layout for 35 dwellings has been submitted as part of the latest amended scheme. “Layout and landscaping” and “Appearance and Scale” sections has been included within the Design and Access Statement (addendum) It is stated that the existing farmstead represents a significant mass of buildings which is visually prominent when approaching Barton from the south along Wells Lane. Emphasis has been placed on the revised site boundary that would limit the development to the existing built form of the farm with the overall mass of the residential development being significantly less than the built form and associated hardstanding of the existing farmstead, with the revised scheme having a greater sense of containment and viewed against the backdrop of the existing buildings in the village from viewpoints to the south. At paragraph 4.24 it is concluded that the development would not result in a “harmful incursion into the open countryside”. Whilst concerns have been raised following consultation on the indicative layout regarding the creation of hard edges, the lack of space for any effective landscaping and the density of the scheme, it is important to remember that the layout is indicative and there is likely to be flexibility in any final layout in terms of the provision of public open space within the scheme if it is agreed that the required contribution can be better met through the improvement and enhancement of existing facilities maintained by the Parish Council that is located close to the application site.

7.22 Whilst Local Plan policies generally recognise that new development will often result

in some visual impacts and these have to be weighed against the wider benefits of new development, the conclusion within the Design and Access Statement (addendum) that there could potentially be a net visual benefit as a result of the replacement of the farm buildings with a residential development of smaller mass and of lower density is a reasonable one. Providing an appropriate landscaping scheme and site layout is agreed at reserved matters stage, the proposed development in this location with the number of units proposed could be achieved without any significant or unacceptable harm caused to the character of the south-

Appendix 1

27

east of the village and its relationship with the open countryside to the east and south.

7.23 Concerns have been raised in consultation responses submitted in relation to the

amended application by both CPRE and the agents of The Ashes Farm application regarding the potential adverse impacts on the landscape and “edge-of-settlement” character of village of the development is approved. Whilst these concerns are acknowledged, a detailed consideration of the application site shows that the development would largely been seen within the context of existing development from most important public viewpoints despite being located on the eastern side of Wells Lane. The amended proposal would be located on the footprint of the existing farm buildings and yard area and with the addition of landscaping and public open space would represent a less physically dominant development. The site is also lower than Wells Lane which in combination with existing hedgerows and boundaries would help to reduce the visual prominence of the development and impact on the surrounding landscape. The agent for The Ashes Farm development has raised the potential landscape and environmental impacts of any relocation of the current farm. Such impacts would have to be assessed when a planning application for new farm buildings based on the character and nature of the scheme and its location.

Relationship to Surrounding Land Uses and Neighbouring Properties 7.23 The application site is located opposite the existing Wells Green residential

development on the opposite side of Wells Lane, whilst the converted dwelling (previously the King William IV public house) is directly to the north. Although the layout provided is indicative, the size of the application site and the reduced number of residential units proposed would result in a relatively low density scheme capable of achieving appropriate separation distances between the proposed new dwellings and existing residential properties, including the aforementioned converted public house to the north and the existing farmhouse at Rose Villa Farm to the south.

Potential Amenity Benefits (Noise and Odour) 7.24 In the Planning Statement, Design and Access Statement (Addendum) submitted

with the application and a subsequent statement submitted by the agent (dated 12th June 2018), the potential public benefits resulting from the scheme ceasing agricultural activities at Rose Villa Farm have been emphasised. The dairy farm enterprise of 800 head of cattle currently generates noise, odour and traffic issues in the village. Reference is made in the aforementioned documents to a number of specific logged complaints made to Environmental Health in respect to strong odours and smells in the village and also to the results of an Odour Assessment submitted as part of a planning application for residential development on a smaller application site directly to the north of Rose Villa Farm. In their correspondence dated 12th June, the agent has clarified the various farm-related activities that take place at Rose Villa Farm, including the activity type and its nature. Such activities are considered to generate noise, odour and traffic, including early morning and mid-afternoon milking, mucking out of sheds, silage and slurry management.

7.25 Although the evidence provided by Environmental Health to the agent confirms that

several complaints have been made to them in relation to strong odours allegedly emanating from Rose Villa Farm over the course of several years, Environmental Health have confirmed that no action has been taken or statutory nuisance established due to a lack of appropriate evidence submitted by the complainers. Noise and odour assessments undertaken in relation to the site to the north of Rose Villa Farm do identify noise and odour issues generated by the activities at Rose

Appendix 1

28

Villa Farm, although these assessments were relatively limited in their scope and extent given that they were submitted in relation to an application relating to a specific application site. Even within the data collected for these assessments there were substantial variations in the intensity and timings of any excessive smells and noise dependent on what activities were being undertaken and when and dependent on the direction of the wind blowing across the Rose Villa Farm site.

7.26 Nevertheless, based on the information available of the farm activities, the

complaints to Environmental Health in respect to odour issues, the nature of several consultation responses received referring to odour issues from the farm and the results of previous odour and noise surveys previously carried out adjacent to the application site, it is reasonable to conclude that the ceasing of farming activities at Rose Villa Farm would have a marked positive public benefit to the locale and residents in terms of ceasing current issues of noise and particularly odour that is currently being generated by the agricultural-related activities at Rose Villa Farm, even acknowledging that the full extent and nature of the existing noise and odour issues from the farm have not been fully quantified.

Ecology and Trees 7.27 An Ecological Impact Assessment has been submitted with the application. Whilst

the assessment has been undertaken based on the larger application site as originally proposed, the assessment, analysis and recommended mitigation measures still remain applicable to the scheme as per the latest amendment. The assessment had particular regard to the presence of badgers, bats, great crested newts, reptiles and nesting birds with on-site inspections of the existing farm buildings and trees being carried out as part of the assessment works to assess the presence and potential impact on bat species.

7.28 Having identified the suitability of some the buildings on site for “low” roosting

potential by bats during an initial assessment, follow up emergence and return survey work was undertaken to confirm the presence (or likely absence) of roosting bats in the buildings. The results of the survey works indicated that one of the farm buildings (building B8) was being used by a small number of soprano pipstrelle and whiskered bats, likely as a day roost. The demolition of this building would result in a major-negative impact to roosting bats at site level, but would have a low impact on a wider level. If the building B8 is to be demolished as part of the proposed residential development, then the assessment recommends the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures prior to and during the works to avoid significant impacts on roosting bats.

7.29 Having undertaken appropriate site inspections and desk-top investigations, the

assessment has concluded that the proposals would have a negligible impact on Great Crested Newts and reptiles. Although the agricultural buildings on site as well as the trees and hedgerows around the site were considered to be of potential value for nesting birds, site inspections found no evidence of nests in these habitats. The assessment does however recommend that suitable mitigation and compensation measures are incorporated into the development to lower any overall impact on nesting birds. Mitigation measures are also recommended to avoid the spread of butterfly-bush, an aggressive non-native species identified during the site inspection.

7.30 Based on the findings and conclusions of the assessment, a number of mitigation

and enhancement measures are recommended to be implemented in paragraphs 6.1 and 6.2 of the assessment report, including any mitigation and enhancement

Appendix 1

29

measures required as part of the European Protected Species mitigation licence; the protection of trees and vegetation through the erection of protective fencing and the undertaking of any demolition or vegetation clearance outside of the bird nesting season; the implementation of a wildlife-sensitive lighting scheme and the implementation of appropriate measures to remove the butterfly-bush on-site; the installation within the development of swallow nesting cups as well as the incorporation within the development of bird and bat bricks; the planting of native plant species as part of any landscaping scheme (including aquatic vegetation within the drainage pond). The Yorkshire Wildlife Trust have previously expressed no concerns about the assessment undertaken but have confirmed that they would expect the mitigation measures stated in the Assessment to be implemented (via condition) should outline planning permission be approved.

7.31 The overall conclusion of the Ecological Impact Assessment is that providing the

aforementioned mitigation and enhancement measures are implemented, there would not be a significant impact to protected species and habitats as a result of the development. It is therefore recommended that these mitigation and enhancement measures are conditioned if outline planning permission is approved.

7.32 An Arboricultural Report has been submitted with the application as originally

submitted that has surveyed and assessed the trees and hedgerows within the application site. It is recommended that the mitigation measures within the report for the protection of important trees and hedgerows during the construction phase of the development (as identified in the report) are conditioned if outline planning permission is approved.

Lighting 7.33 In addition to domestic lighting in and around the dwellings themselves,

development of the site is also likely to require additional highway lighting. Having regard to existing light levels in the area a suitably designed scheme for such additional lighting would not contribute in any significant way to light pollution levels and therefore there would be no conflict with policy requirements. The lighting scheme would also need to be designed to have regard to ecological mitigation requirements as referred to in the “Ecology” section of this report.

Impact on Historic Buildings and their Setting 7.34 There is no conservation area in Barton. Concerns were raised within consultation

responses submitted in relation to the application as originally submitted regarding the lack of assessment and potential harmful impact of the development on the setting of listed buildings within the vicinity of the application site, namely the grade II listed Barton Lodge to the south-west of the Rose Villa farmstead. The reduction in the site area submitted as part of the amendments to the original scheme means that the application is no longer directly opposite this listed building and its curtilage with the nearest part of the application site to the property being more than 130 metres to the north-east. Given this distance and relationship between Barton Lodge and the amended application site, there would be no material impact on the setting of this listed building, or any other listed buildings elsewhere within the village.

Ground Conditions/Land Quality 7.35 Environmental Health have considered the submitted Phase 1 Geo-Environmental

Desk Study which accompanies the application and are satisfied with the conclusion that overall contamination risk from past uses is considered to be lo, although they do note that the study identifies potential pollution linkages and a

Appendix 1

30

potential risk to human health from soil contamination hazards that may be present beneath the farmyard part of the site and from asbestos containing materials present within farm buildings

7.36 Notwithstanding the recommendation within the study for further site investigation,

Environmental Health recommend the undertaking of a Phase 2 Geo-Environmental Risk Assessment is carried out incorporating intrusive investigation with the aims of confirming the distribution and quantity of concentrations of potentially contaminative materials present within the deposits beneath the site. They also recommend that a wider investigation site that considers typical pollutants from the current farm use, the scope of this investigation to be agreed prior to the commencement of works. Appropriate conditions are recommended by Environmental Health (see section 6 above) to secure such an assessment with appropriate provision for remediation and subsequent verification if required in the light of that further assessment or arising from any unanticipated contamination found during the course of development.

Crime and Disorder 7.37 The Police Designing Out Crime Officer has confirmed that the development site

lies within an area of relatively low crime and disorder levels, although the development has the potential to increase crime and disorder levels if “designing out of crime” principles are not considered and implemented. Several observations have been made in the “Designing out Crime Report” submitted as North Yorkshire Police’s consultation response, relating to design and layout; tenure; access and movement; public open space; ambiguous space; defensible space; boundary protection; car parking; cycle storage; lighting; landscaping and the construction phase of development and the Police’s latest consultation response (in respect to the 35 unit scheme) has re-emphasised their concern about a potential layout that would locate Public Open Space adjacent to the rear gardens of properties with a lack of overlooking from nearby dwellings.

7.38 The layout as submitted is only indicative and the number of units proposed in

combination with the size of the application site should ensure that potential issues raised by North Yorkshire Police can be adequately addressed at Reserved Matters stage. Should outline planning permission be granted, North Yorkshire Police have recommended a planning condition requiring details to be submitted and approved of the crime prevention and mitigation measures to be incorporated into the development that seek to address the potential crime and disorder issues raised in the “Designing out Crime Report”.

Carbon Savings and Sustainable Construction 7.39 No specific measures have been put forward at this outline stage, but there should

be no reason why the development ought not to be capable of exceeding the requirements of Part L of the Building Regulations as far as is feasible and viable as required by Policy CP2 of the Local Plan Core Strategy. Provision of an energy statement and details of the measures to be taken can be reserved by planning condition.

Planning Obligation 7.40 In the event of outline planning permission being granted, a Section 106 Agreement

would be essential in order to ensure that appropriate provision is made for affordable housing as part of the proposed development, and to secure the provision of any on-site/off-site recreation provision and/or contribution. In the

Appendix 1

31

absence of such an Agreement, the proposal would not be compliant with the policies of the Development Plan.

Delivery 7.41 The issue of delivery was mentioned as a potential concern with regards the

application site in consultation responses received in relation to the application. Although the site is an operational dairy farm, the agent has clarified in his correspondence of 12th June that the submission of the application is “not a paper exercise” with a genuine intent on behalf of the applicants to bring the site forward for development with discussions having taken place with up to three developers. It has also been clarified that it is the intention to reinvest the proceeds from the development into the relocation of the farm activities and operations with contract negotiations taking place if/when planning permission is granted. The agent is confident that the lifetime of a planning permission would be “more than sufficient” time to allow for alternative premises to be sought and any contract negotiations to take place. The agent also disputes the alleged cost of the pumping station put forward in a solicitor’s letter previously submitted on behalf of the applicants of The Ashes Farm application, believing that the cost would be half that estimated in the solicitor’s letter.

7.42 Whilst the ability to deliver to a scheme is a material planning consideration and the

redevelopment and potential relocation of any existing farm enterprise does raise understandable practical questions in relation to the deliverability of a scheme on an active agricultural site, there is no clear or obvious impediment related to the site and proposed scheme to be able to conclude that the development proposed would not be deliverable within the timescales of a planning permission, should outline planning permission be granted. Having considered the overall viability of both the existing and previous schemes submitted for this site, Officers have consistently maintained that a viable residential development for approximately 35 dwellings with a 30% affordable housing provision would be financially viable on the site. The agent of The Ashes Farm application has raised concerns regarding the loss of employment should the existing dairy farm enterprise not be relocated. Whilst the ceasing of farming activities at Rose Villa farm does have the potential to result in a relatively small number of jobs and economic opportunities, the impact is likely to be modest given the size of the family-run enterprise and would be partially offset through the temporary creation of employment opportunities in the construction and development industries.

8.0 Conclusions 8.1 Whilst planning applications need to be determined “on their own merits” and having

considered all relevant planning issues associated with the proposed development, the conclusions and recommendation below have also had to have regard to the current proposal for 35 dwellings at The Ashes Farm as a material consideration. This is because if permission were to be granted to both schemes they would significantly exceed the planned level of sustainable growth for the village in a way that would be disproportionate to the settlement size and conflict with the proper scale and distribution of housing development in this part of the Local Plan area.

8.2 Following various amendments to both schemes, they are both proposing 35 units

and 30 per cent affordable housing provision. In terms of unit numbers and affordable housing provision, both schemes are considered to meet Local Plan policy in terms of the scale and distribution of housing and the requisite affordable housing provision for the North Richmondshire sub area. Equally, both schemes

Appendix 1

32

have no outstanding objections from any technical consultees, although formal confirmation is being sought from the Highway Authority that they have no objections to either amended scheme.

8.3 Having considered the details of each scheme in light of Local Plan and national

planning policy, both applications (as amended) are considered to be sustainable if considered in isolation, subject to clarification on specific issues mentioned in the respective reports. However, as made clear above, to potentially approve both, would result in an unacceptable level of growth for the village which would be in conflict the scale and distribution expectations of the Local Plan and would therefore be unsustainable.

8.4 In order to be able to make a recommendation to Members, it is therefore

necessary to consider and compare the planning merits of this scheme in relation to the comparative merits of the alternative Ashes Farm scheme.

8.5 Both sites are relatively well related to existing services and facilities with

connectivity to Silver Street and therefore the village shop, village green, pub, bus stops and primary school, all of which are within walking distances of the respective application sites. Consultation responses received from local residents have expressed a prevailing view that The Rose Villa Farm offers a more convenient connection to facilities such as the village shop, public house, school and play area and bus stops - as unlike The Ashes Farm application - there would be no need to cross Silver Street, the main road through the village.

8.6 The Highway Authority have previously confirmed that the highway network can

accommodate the traffic flows arising from the scale of both proposed development and subject to the implementation of planning conditions, have raised no objections to either amended scheme. Whilst concerns have been raised by local residents in consultation responses in relation to potential vehicle access and traffic issues, there has been a greater level of concern expressed in relation to perceived highway issues for The Ashes Farm application, although it is important to clarify again that the Highway Authority have raised no highway safety issues with either scheme.

8.7 Provision is made for a sustainable approach to surface water drainage for both

schemes and Northumbrian Water are satisfied that sufficient provision can be made available within the foul drainage and water supply infrastructure to be able to accommodate the scale of each individual development proposed. Equally, suitable provision is to be made within each scheme to meet the additional requirements for open space/recreation facilities arising from the development to meet the “Fields in Trust” standards for a development of this size, whilst taking into consideration any views of the Parish Council on the potential improvement of existing play facilities within the village.

8.8 Notwithstanding the views and expressed preference (in landscape terms) of

CPRE, there will be impacts on the local landscape from both developments, but not such as to warrant rejection of either proposal in the light of the wider public benefits that both schemes could potentially bring. It is acknowledged that The Ashes Farm scheme would have a closer relationship to the existing residential confines of the village, although both sites are located adjacent to the Development Limits of the village

Appendix 1

33

8.9 Unlike the Rose Villa Farm site, part of The Ashes Farm site is classified as

‘brownfield’ land due to the presence of the applicant’s haulage company. Whilst Local Plan policy and the NPPF state that there should be a preference to development ‘brownfield’ land over ‘greenfield’ sites, the extent of the brownfield land in comparison with the greenfield land is relatively modest. The amended Rose Villa Farm application site would be on the footprint of the existing building group, rather than agricultural fields, whilst The Ashes Farm is seeking to develop a proportion of the farm’s associated agricultural land as well as the area currently occupied by the building group. Neither site would result in the loss of the best and most versatile agricultural land (i.e. Grade 1 land), although The Ashes Farm would develop a small proportion of Grade 2 land that is not currently built on. Weighing up these land classification issues within the overall “planning balance” it is difficult to conclude that either scheme is more preferable than the other as there would be no significant use of brownfield land or loss of grade 1 agricultural land in either case.

8.10 Both developments can potentially be achieved without any unacceptable impacts

on neighbour amenity, subject to The Ashes Farm scheme being able to fully address the technical issues and concerns raised by the agent of the Rose Villa Farm application to the satisfaction of Environmental Health. Appropriate ecological mitigation measures have been provided for both amended developments that the Yorkshire Wildlife Trust are supportive of. Likewise, both developments are considered capable of delivering carbon savings by exceeding the minimum requirements of the Building Regulations.

8.11 Whilst there is the reasonable prospect that the amenities of local residents would

be improved from the ceasing of current farming activities at both respective farm sites in terms of heavy traffic movements, odours and noise, the consultation responses received from local residents clearly highlight that the ceasing of farming activities at Rose Villa Farm would result in an amenity improvement to the locale where strong smells believed to emanate from the farm have been noted. No similar odour issue has been raised by local residents in relation The Ashes Farm site following consultation. Evidence provided by the agent of odour complaints (about Rose Villa Farm) made to Environmental Health and odour survey work carried out in relation to an adjacent application site would support the views expressed by local residents that odours emanating from Rose Villa farm pose a genuine amenity issue particularly when specific farming activities are being undertaken. Whilst it is acknowledged that some of the amenity issues associated with The Rose Villa Farm site could be resolved by implementing farm management measures, the nature of the farming enterprise, the direction of the prevailing wind and the location of existing residential development in the immediate area means that there are inherent amenity issues associated with the operation of the dairy farm in this location.

8.12 Whilst no details have been provided within the Rose Villa farm application

regarding the intended relocation of the existing farming enterprise (or any associated phasing), there is no reasonable evidence available to be able to conclude that the residential development proposed would not be deliverable within the timescales of an outline planning permission, should permission be granted. It is acknowledged that The Ashes Farm enterprise already has a site to relocate to, although given the many potential issues that may arise with any farm relocation, it is difficult to decisively conclude that one site is more likely to be delivered than the other at this outline stage.

Appendix 1

34

8.13 Whilst there are potential public benefits for both schemes, having carefully

considered and compared their respective issues and planning merits as well as the relevant consultation comments that have been received particularly as submitted from local residents, it is concluded that The Rose Villa Farm application would – on balance - result in greater public benefits, if approved than The Ashes Farm application.

8.14 Overall, the development accords with all relevant policies of the Development Plan

when read as a whole and will achieve the policy objectives of the National Planning Policy Framework.

9.0 Recommendation 9.1 That subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement providing for:

• a scheme to deliver 30% affordable dwellings (as defined by the National Planning Policy Framework) as part of the development with details of the tenure, mix and types of affordable properties to be determined at the reserved matters stage. Affordable dwellings to be constructed in phases alongside market dwellings and to be occupied by those defined as being in need of accommodation. Provisions for affordable dwellings to remain in perpetuity;

• the provision of on-site recreation/play facilities or an equivalent financial contribution for off-site provision based on a policy requirement of policy of 203 square metres.

conditional outline planning permission be GRANTED for the reasons summarised at section 8 above.

9.2 In addition to standard planning conditions covering matters including submission

and approval of the ‘reserved matters’ it is also recommended that the following specific matters be covered by conditions to be imposed on the grant of this permission:

• Approval for a maximum number of 35 dwellings on the site. • Submission and approval of a detailed design for foul and surface water

drainage with provision for management and maintenance based on the details provided by the revised Flood Risk Assessment (March 2018)

• The approved drainage scheme to be implemented prior to completion of the development.

• Conditions recommended by the Highway Authority. • Provision of on-site play and open space facilities to meet Fields in Trust

standards in accordance with details to be submitted and approved, including arrangements for their future management and maintenance, or appropriate enhancement of existing facilities in the village in consultation with the Parish Council and LPA.

• Development to be carried out in accordance with the mitigation measures as specified in the Ecological Impact Assessment document, including important tree/hedge protection measures..

• Submission and approval of a detailed assessment of risks from contamination with provision for remediation as necessary and subsequent verification of all measures taken.

• Submission and approval of a lighting scheme to minimise the potential for light pollution and designed to be sensitive to bats using the area.

Appendix 1

35

• Submission and approval of a scheme alongside the approval of reserved

matters for the incorporation of crime prevention measures in the development as recommended by North Yorkshire Police (as listed in section 6 above).

• Construction works to only take place between 8.00 a.m. and 6.00 p.m. Monday to Friday and 9.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m. Saturday with no working on Sundays and Bank Holidays.

• Submission and approval of an energy statement with proposals for carbon savings in excess of Building Regulation requirements where feasible and viable.

10.0 Further Information File Reference: 17/00829/OUT Appendices: Appendix 1 & 2: Extracts from the submitted plans and proposals Contact Officer: Ian Nesbit Email/Telephone: ian.nesbit@richmondshire.gov.uk

01748 901126

Appendix 1

36