Agenda item

DM/16/01129/VOC - Flatts Farm, Toronto, Bishop Auckland

Variation of conditions no.2 (approved plans) of planning approval DM/15/00110/FPA (re-development to allow the staging of historical show) to allow changes to site layout, and design of buildings, and condition 13 (restriction of access) and removal of condition no. 9 (car park opening times)

 

DM/16/01134/FPA - Land to the east of Red Barns and North of A689, Addision Road, Toronto, Bishop Auckland

Change of use of land to temporary event parking (1,400 spaces) including coach drop off area and associated infrastructure. Formation of pedestrian access to main event site

 

DM/17/01800/FPA - North of Barrington street and A689, Toronto Bishop Auckland

Change of use of agricultural land to ecological mitigation provision at Walsh Site at site of former brickworks

 

DM/17/01802/FPA - Land at Newton Cap to the south of Waterside Cottages

Change of use of agricultural land to ecological mitigation provision

Minutes:

The Committee considered a report of the Senior Planning Officer regarding the following applications:

i)             Variation of conditions no.2 (approved plans) of planning approval DM/15/00110/FPA (re-development to allow the staging of historical show) to allow changes to site layout, and design of buildings, and condition 13 (restriction of access) and removal of condition no. 9 (car park opening times) at Flatts Farm, Toronto, Bishop Auckland;

ii)            Change of use of land to temporary event parking (1,400 spaces) including coach drop off area and associated infrastructure and formation of pedestrian access to main event site on land to the east of Red Barns and North of A689, Addison Road, Toronto, Bishop Auckland;

iii)           Change of use of agricultural land to ecological mitigation provision Walsh Site at the site of the former brickworks, North of Barrington street and A689, Toronto, Bishop Auckland;

iv)           Change of use of agricultural land to ecological mitigation provision on land at Newton Cap to the south of Waterside Cottages.

(for copy see file of Minutes)

 

S Pilkington, Senior Planning Officer, gave a detailed presentation on the applications which included a site location plan, aerial photographs, views across the event site, a view of the modified access, views of access into and the parking layout at the Colliery Fields site and the approved and proposed masterplans.

 

The Senior Planning Officer informed the Committee that an additional four letters of objection had been received but had not raised any new areas of objection that the report did not already cover.

 

A document pack which had been supplied by objectors and included a map of the Colliery Field Car Park area, letter dated 23 June 2017 from Richard Buxton solicitors and a ‘Salient Facts’ sheet about The Shield’s Car Park had been circulated to Committee Members in advance of the meeting and hard copies were available at the meeting (for copy see file of Minutes).

 

The Senior Planning Officer informed the Committee that the contents of the letter from Richard Buxton had been considered and officers were of the view that there was sufficient information to assess the environmental impacts of the applications.

 

Mr J Wilson addressed the Committee to object to the application.  Mr Wilson informed the Committee that the residents of Toronto were dreading this season’s Kynren event and showed a video to the Committee of traffic exiting the Colliery Field Car Park after an evening staging of the event.

 

Ms T Pemberton, on behalf of local residents, addressed the Committee to object to the application for the Colliery Fields car park.

 

The video which had been shown to the Committee was illustrative of the operating conditions of the Colliery Field car park during the staging of last year’s Kynren events, because this was a retrospective planning application.  When the video was taken last year there had been up to 900 cars on site and it gave a useful sense of what local residents had put up with and already experienced.  This application was for up to 1400 cars on the same site, which was half as many again as last year.

 

The saved Wear Valley Local Plan at Policy TM1 stated that tourist schemes would be supported where the scale of the development did not affect the amenities of local residents.  The video shown demonstrated that the amenity of local residents was already being adversely affected.

 

The nearest house was some 34 metres to the road and 40 metres from the car park exit.  As a comparison, the distance to the back of the Chamber in which the meeting was being held was some 20 metres.

 

It was misleading for the report to state that at the worst case scenario noise levels from the car park would not disturb sleep because this is already happening.  Last Saturday night the Colliery Fields car park had been used by 341 cars out of a potential 1400, yet couldn’t be emptied before 12.10 a.m., with traffic management being noisily tidied away after 1 a.m.

 

While some efforts to address the issue of traffic seemed to have been made, for example the main road has remained open for through traffic and temporary traffic lights used during events.  However, the temporary traffic lights resulted in traffic stopping and accelerating more often and this resulted in increased noise and fumes.

 

There was an element of chaos and confusion, including:

·         the temporary traffic lights not working

·         a car turned right into wrong lane

·         a car turned right from the main road into the exit lane of car park

·         cars performing U-turns in the main road and exceeding the  speed limit.

 

This was an EIA Development and the Council was required to ensure that all the environmental effects likely to arise from the proposal were assessed before development consent was granted.  The environmental statement and other environmental information relating to this proposal was inadequate and failed to assess the environmental harm for any resident living in areas of Toronto near to the car park exit and the bypass road.

 

Advice received from Richard Buxton, Environmental and Public Law, was that unless the Council effectively regularised the anticipated operations including the requirement for further environmental information then it would be acting unlawfully in granting permission and that injunctive relief may be necessary to prevent the use of the car park at Colliery Fields.

 

Ms A I Dauton, on behalf of Eleven Arches, addressed the Committee in support of the application.

 

Eleven Arches was a registered charity with the objective to produce a world class historical show which added a national tourist destination to the region that delivered tangible, measurable, significant social and economic impact. 

 

On 2 July 2016, Eleven Arches produced and presented the first season of ‘Kynren an epic tale of England’, an open-air summer spectacular on monumental scale.  Orchestrated by a 1,500 volunteers, Kynren offered an enthralling family entertainment for all ages.

 

The site was purchased by the Auckland Castle Trust in 2012 to provide a seamless addition to the castle experience to a wider audience, away from the historically and ecologically sensitive setting of the Park itself.  Eleven Arches was set up as a sister charity to Auckland Castle Trust to further the development of the site, and support the creation of an international tourist destination in Bishop Auckland.

 

Eleven Arches’ mission was to produce Kynren as a world-class show, to be a trip attractor which encouraged overnight visits to County Durham and brought tourism-related expenditure, capital investment and jobs.  It was overnight visitors who made a significant difference to the regional economy.  While day trippers typically spend £19 per day, overnight visitors were likely to spend £157, a driver for the creation of jobs.  Offsite tourism expenditure around Kynren was expected to be in the region of £4.75million per annum, and that would be compounded by what was spent at other attractions when visitors built a short or long-stay around the show.

 

In the inaugural season more than 100,000 tickets were sold with 23% of visitors coming from outside the North East.  Visitors came from all over the UK and all over the world, including the USA, China, South Africa and the Middle East.  In 2017, 17 shows would be staged with an expected footfall of 136,000 and 18 shows were planned for 2018 and beyond, attracting up to 144,000 visitors to Bishop Auckland each season.

 

Kynren was not-for-profit.  As a registered charity Eleven Arches was committed to education and community development and endeavoured to professionally train all volunteers in the key skills needed to produce a world-class show to ensure its longevity for decades to come.  Based on extensive research commissioned after the first season, over 85% of volunteers felt they had developed new skills thanks to their Kynren experience.

 

Kynren had given its volunteers a sense of belonging and an appreciation of the importance of being part of a community.  Volunteers felt great pride in what had been achieved through Kynren, both on and off stage, and their contribution to creating a better future for Bishop Auckland.

 

Kynren was created thanks to an initial £35m investment, funded entirely by charitable donations, used for the infrastructure of the site and the show area, and creating, producing, operating and marketing the show in its first year. 

 

From 2017 onwards, Kynren operated on the previous year’s proceeds.  Profits from tickets and merchandise sales flowed back to the charity to reinvest in the show and keep it at its best.  However, there was a need to continually increase the skill level for volunteers to make the show the success it must be.  There was a critical need for additional funds to train more people in more skills each year, to create extraordinary with ordinary people and to sustain the long-lasting social and economic regeneration loop.

 

In 2016 the community around Bishop Auckland made history and it now thrived on its renewed sense of belonging, pride and purpose.  Kynren was truly an inspiration for participants and visitors alike.  The backstage of Kynren showcased a vibrant community with a soul, humility, positivity, warmth, dedication and professionalism.  Eleven Arches had delivered the first stepping stone of a bold and unconventional regeneration mission in the North East, an example of a work of arts underpinned by an innovative and engaging education and community development programme.

 

The Senior Planning Officer informed the Committee that Environmental Health Officers had visited the site and considered the cumulative impact was no greater than through the original planning approval.  Complaints of statutory noise nuisance had been investigated and had been determined not to be so.  The noise generated through the show itself was lower than anticipated at the original planning application.

 

Councillor Wilkes asked what the proposed s106 payment of £307 per event was for and asked why, when the event had been staged last year, it had taken until the second season of the event to commence before this application was brought to Committee.

 

The Senior Planning Officer replied that the s106 payment of £307 per event replicated that which was included in the original planning application and was for traffic and enforcement costs.  It was regrettable that the application had taken so long to be brought to Committee but there had been a lot of changes to the masterplan which included on-site grazing.  Work had taken place to provide optimum solutions at other sites.

 

Councillor Taylor informed the Committee that both sides in the presentations had spoken passionately.  Kynren had been a wonderful event to date and Ms Daulon seemed to be offering discussions with the objectors to address their concerns.  Councillor Taylor hoped some agreement could be reached.  He did not consider the video shown by the objectors to truly reflect disturbance caused by traffic because it had been taken at the roadside and not from a house.

 

Councillor Shield considered the impact on local amenity against Local Plan saved Policies and considered the application was in breach of Policy TR1 which stated that schemes which provided tourist facilities should have adequate parking facilities and Policy GD1 which stated that new development should not cause significant pollution to the environment in terms of noise pollution and not create unacceptable levels of traffic which would exceed the capacity of the local road network.

 

Councillor Clare informed the Committee that Paragraph 98 of the report acknowledged the conflict with Local Plan Policies, including GD1, but this issue had been considered when the original planning application was made and approved because the benefits of Kynren were considered to outweigh the negatives.

 

Councillor Clare did not consider that the retrospective changes significantly changed the original planning permission to now make it unacceptable.  Referring to noise pollution, monitoring had been carried out by Environmental Health Officers which confirmed that noise levels generated at the shows were below those anticipated in the consideration of the original planning application and as specified in the event licence.  The issue of noise from car parks was addressed in paragraph 121 of the report which stated that Environmental Health Officers had investigated complaints received during the first shows last year and had concluded that a statutory nuisance had not arisen.

 

Councillor Clare informed the Committee that it he found it difficult to decide about light pollution from cars leaving the car park and whether the proposed landscape buffer would screen out most of the direct light.

 

Councillor Clare referred to the objectors stating there was inadequate Environmental Impact Assessment of the application and that if the Committee proceeded to determine the application on the basis of the report then it would be acting unlawfully.  If the Committee was given an assurance that this was not so, then Councillor Clare considered that the application should be considered as the original application was, that is by weighing the negative impact of the application against the many positive benefits to the local community.

 

In reply to a question from Councillor Bell, Councillor Tinsley confirmed that the Colliery Fields car park had been used since the event started last year.

 

Councillor Richardson considered Kynren to be a successful event and an attribute to the County, which brought in tourists and contributed to the local tourism industry.

 

Councillor Tinsley informed the Committee that the principle of a large scale visitor attraction in the area had been established.  He considered that the event organisers had tried to mitigate disturbance caused by it through staging events at different times where possible and also by using lighting for the car park which was mains connected and therefore did not have generators.  Car parking provision in Bishop Auckland Town Centre had been increased.  Councillor Tinsley asked what assessment had taken place on residential noise receptors.

 

The Senior Planning Officer replied that Environmental Health Officers had visited the site and provided an informed narrative on noise at the site.  A specific noise survey would not add to this.  Environmental Health Officers considered that the movement of traffic on the bypass road would be the dominant noise source.

 

D Wafer, Strategic Traffic Manager informed the Committee that the traffic management plan which had been agreed for last year’s event had changed for this year.  Last year the bypass road had been closed but this year it remained open.  Traffic management for the event was reviewed on an event by event basis.  There were no highway safety concerns about entering and exiting the event.

 

D Taylor, Property, Planning and Projects Legal Manager advised the Committee that the letter from Richard Buxton which had been submitted by the objectors suggested that this was an EIA Development and as such the Council must ensure that all environmental effects likely to arise from it were assessed before consent was granted.  Officers had been satisfired that there was sufficient information available to make a determination on the application.  The issue of retrospective planning permission in respect of an EIA Development was covered at Paragraph 146 of the report, and it was suggested that in these applications the applicant argued that ‘exceptional circumstances’ applied because of the need to undertake work retrospectively to facilitate the delivery of the show and to secure the wider social and economic benefits.

 

Moved by Councillor Tinsley, Seconded by Councillor Richardson and

 

Resolved:

(i)            That application DM/16/01129/VOC be approvedsubject to entering into a section 106 legal agreement to secure the provision of :-

·         An annual parking contribution of £4340 towards the administration of traffic and parking measures associated with the events.

·           A Parking contribution of £307 per event.

·           The implementation of applications DM/17/01800/FPA and DM/17/01802/FPA to deliver ecological mitigation.

 

and the conditions contained in the report.

 

(ii)          That application DM/16/01134/FPA be approved subject to the conditions contained in the report

 

(iii)         That application DM/17/01800/FPA be approved subject to the conditions contained in the report.

 

(iv)         That application DM/17/01802/FPA be approved subject to the conditions contained in the report.

Supporting documents: