5 November 2025 Planning Meeting

Haverah Park with Beckwithshaw Parish Council

Notes from meeting 5 November 2025

In attendance – Cllr D Spence, Cllr A Ellis, Cllr M David, Cllr J Parish, Cllr Mrs S Swires and Parish Clerk Mrs J Galloway in the Village Hall..

PLANNING

Planning Application 22/00089/EIAMAJ

Comments

Haverah Park with Beckwithshaw Parish Council are objecting to this application as set out below.

Traffic, Transport, Existing Road Infrastructure and Connectivity

• Bus Route

Not all the houses will be in the recommended distance of 400m from a bus stop and does not support the existing development at Harlow Grange or the village of Beckwithshaw which would benefit from a closer entry/exit point as it has been specifically excluded from any extended bus route.

• Cycle Track

No confirmation that the proposed cycle track will be extended to the east to connect to the existing Otley Road track. This lack of connectivity will not support the implied increase in cycling as supposed by the Traffic Plan i.e. pupils attending the nearby schools would not consider it a safe travel option.

• Existing Road Infrastructure

Appendix L Highway Link Capacity Table and Plans

• Plans 1and 2 highlight issues of ‘Sharp Bends’ on Howhill Road, Lady Lane, Hilltop Lane and Whinney Lane for which no remediation work is included in any of the lists of road improvements.
• Table 52 includes the following descriptions of the capacity of existing roads in the immediate vicinity of the development which will inevitably be used to increased traffic generated by the development.
• Howhill Road ‘Carriage way allows for two way working for cars. HGV traffic may be required to use additional land (We presume this to mean grass verges) to pass other vehicles’.
• Lady Lane and Whinney Lane ‘Rural in character predominately two way working for cars’.
• Hill Top Lane and Hill Foot Lane ‘rural in nature – carriage way generally wide enough to allow two cars to pass one another though there are narrow sections with evidence of grass verges being used to allow vehicles to pass one another’.

There is no evidence to suggest any mitigations are proposed to mitigate these problems. None of these lanes have footpaths or street lighting making them unfit for additional traffic allowing for the fact that they also provide links to Harrogate Ringway.

The existing rural road infrastructure needs to be reviewed and improved to meet the entirety of the housing developments currently proposed for the West of Harrogate.

We note that road widening of Otley Road is planned.  Could confirmation be supplied that this will not impact the current pavement running between Harlow Hill and Beckwithshaw?

 

 

• Education

Lack of sufficient drop off and pick up provision for proposed new school educating up to 420 children in its two-form intake.

No certainty that the proposed new school is programmed for construction to meet the     phased needs of the development. Information currently provided by NYC indicates that           neighbouring schools are currently at near or over capacity for the school year 25/26. If            demand and supply are not synchronised the outcome will be more car journeys.

No details of how and where additional Secondary School Places will be provided. All       existing Secondary Schools fall outside the accepted travel norm of 2000m from home to        school again increasing the likelihood of additional car journeys.

• Local Centre

No information provided about who will be responsible for building the proposed ‘Local Centre’ and how it will be funded or what it’s function will be? Is it community or commercial in nature?  We would like to point out that there is a distinct lack of healthcare provision in the vicinity.  The TWimpey plans indicate local healthcare sites which are misleading as one is a private aesthetic dental clinic and the other a private cosmetic clinic – clearly poorly Googled research!  It is also worth mentioning that many of the ‘plans’ in the TWimpey document have been ‘flipped’ and should be produced with the correct orientation e.g. Fig 9.2 of the Masterplan document ‘Coloured planning layout’ dated 07/24 and others.

• 70 Bed Affordable Housing

Lack of any information regarding the form, storey height, parking provisions etc.. We also note that this development will in excess of 400m from the bus route.  It also appears to be more than 70 bed with 35 single bed units and 35 two-bed units mentioned in the planning document.  The building is mentioned both as a ‘care facility’ and ‘affordable housing’.  Which is it?

• Environment Agency

We support the concerns raised by the Environment Agency re ground water,     contamination and run off from attenuation.

 

 

TRAFFIC SIGN

 

It was decided to consult with the North Yorkshire Council’s legal team on this subject.

A response to be sent to Fewzed, who sent a quote for repair of sign, that we, as a public funded body, need to obtain proper legal advice before proceeding further.