The North York Moors National Park Authority has been told there are “too many loose ends” for its controversial plans for new headquarters to be given the go-ahead.
Instead, North Yorkshire councillors have deferred a decision for more work to be done on the application for a multi-million-pound development outside the national park in Helmsley.
The park authority wants to build offices and a depot on designated employment land in Riccal Drive.
However, critics have raised concerns about the impact of the scheme on surrounding houses and have called for the application to better address residents’ concerns before being approved.
The development was discussed by councillors at North Yorkshire Council’s Thirsk and Malton planning committee on Thursday.
At the meeting, resident Dan Falchikov called on the council to treat the proposal in the same way the park authority dealt with planning applications it received that were “incomplete or inaccurate”.
“The fact planning officers are suggesting 18 conditions including the provision of a missing construction management plan is indicative of how poor this application is.”
Mr Falchikov added: “The applicant admits there will be more than four tonnes of diesel stored on the site for the use of their rangers, but there’s no hazardous substance plan included for public safety.
“The council should reject or defer any decision until the park provides such a plan.”
Another resident Michael Skehan said: “The principal concern, and it’s beyond argument I think, expressed in the majority of the 43 published objections relates to the inevitable impact of the cumulative additions of traffic along what is now a residential street.”
Planning officer Peter Jones recommended in his report to councillors that planning permission be granted.
He admitted the development would result in a change in the type of traffic visiting the area, with 4x4s used by the park authority and materials needed for the maintenance footpaths likely to be delivered.
But he added: “From my perspective given the quality of the road, given the layout of the road and clearly highway’s perspective on those matters, we don’t consider that that would result in a highway safety issue which would result in a recommendation for refusal.”
However, members of the committee also raised concerns about other issues, including the planting of a buffer zone between neighbouring houses and car parking at the site.
Councillor Steve Mason said: “It does concern me that it’s the national park doing this and we don’t seem to have a proper environmental impact assessment.”
Councillor Malcolm Taylor said: “It’s clear from the debate we’ve had the number of questions that there’s a lot of loose ends around this at the moment.
“I do think there is some further work to be done here. I’m just concerned that this is a major application that we are considering here with quite serious issues and we need to get it right.”
The committee voted unanimously to defer a decision on the application to a future planning meeting.
Be the first to comment