Planning committee defer Harrogate Spring Water Bottling Plant Expansion

The planning application was deferred to come back to planning committee pending further information, being confirmation on the section 106 agreement, and additional information on the discharge of condition 12. Voted for by Cllr Mann, Cllr Lacey and opposed by Cllr Broadbank, Cllr Walker

Councillors who did not attend:

Paul Haslam – Independent
Robert Windass – Conservative
Hannah Gostlow – Liberal Democrats (provided Cllr Walker as substitute)

The Officer’s Report presentation:

NYC responses below are NYC Legal and NYC Planning

Opening comments from the Chairman

Cllr Aldred: They did not agree with the legal challenge points put forward prior to the meeting, so it is valid to continue with the committee.

Cllr Aldred/ Chair – The matter for consideration relate to scale, landscape, appearance. Ecology was assessed under outline planning application.

Questions to officers from Councillors

Cllr Mann – Council will have to sell land. Pinewoods is an asset of community value. Local community groups can make an offer and buy the land.

NYC – Confirmed that there would be an opportunity for groups to bid to buy the land. But that was separate to the planning application.

Cllr Walker – Conflict of interest, if approved. There is a conflict of interest with the council, as NYC benefit financially from Danone – how will it be managed ? the process needs to be legal, transparent and fair.

NYC – The scenario isn’t without precedents. The committee provides an independence in the application. A certificate B was served on the landowner (NYC) in this application.

Cllr Broadbank – Some things are yet to be resolved. Why can we consider something when everything isn’t in place – para 2 10 of the officer report.

NYC – S106 isn’t complete today, and that’s not an uncommon practice. I believe it will be completed.

Cllr Lacey – Acknowledge hearing landscape, appearance and scale, but that was something some time ago. What is the mechanism if there is an environmental consideration as there is much more water being drawn.

NYC – The application was given outline planning.

Cllr Walker – Meets criteria, but how do the plans now meet loca planning policy ?

NYC – Principle of building in the position is already proved.

Cllr Walker – Landscape character, given location in SLA, how does it not cause significant harm ? Can’t see how the impact of the new building on the adjacent Pinewoods is mitigated ?

NYC – This was decided at outline planning stage, but the building will be visible, but is set down.

Cllr Walker – Point of clarification on biodiversity net gain. Conflict in reports. Why is that ? Does it need to go into S106 ? We are not protecting the environment.

NYC – Outline planning approval given before Biodiversity net gain came into force. It won’t follow current biodiversity net gains.

Cllr Broadbank – In 2017 it was acknowledged it would harm the local landscape, and now we have a much bigger development, this is twice the size.

NYC – The size was agreed under outline planning approval

Cllr Aldred – Is it 50 full-time jobs ?

NYC – We can’t confirm that. (however, HSWL did later)

Cllr Aldred – We have an excessive time from 2017 to get where we are now.

NYC – There was covid and a change of makeup at HSWL

Cllr Aldred – under new constitution Councillors can’t receive questions, they need to be to council officers.

Questions from Councillors

Speakers

Neil Hind, chair – Pinewoods Conservation Group

There is no signed and enforceable environmental commitment from Danone.

Members can not lawfully conclude that this application is lawful, and would be open to judicial review. Urge you to refuse

Cllr Schofield – Already legally challenged. No evidence of environmental impact statements. Incomplete and inconsistency in information – this is legally flawed.

Cllr Warnekan – About doing what is right. Mitigation still hasn’t been mapped out. The process is unlawful. The climate emergency gives us more power, and not less. This is totally wrong.

Richard Hall – MD of HSWL – scale, layout, landscape and external appearance “we are a small local business” proudly serve customers, expanding and need to expand production. We met residents and group, the central matter was trees. We will develop a new area of woodland. We would like to continue to contribute to Harrogate, and this expansion is needed to do that. Committed to a 10% net gain using credits. We would create 50 permanent jobs. We surveyed by post 200 and response shows support.