24.11.2014 Views

Mr M Scott, Bagby Airfield, Bagby, Thirsk, North - Hambleton District ...

Mr M Scott, Bagby Airfield, Bagby, Thirsk, North - Hambleton District ...

Mr M Scott, Bagby Airfield, Bagby, Thirsk, North - Hambleton District ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

125. Test Two: is more straightforward, it means being able to meet at least one<br />

of the criteria i) to vi) in CP4 and provide the evidence to prove this. This is<br />

additional to the policy test to demonstrate an exceptional case.<br />

126. There are two potential criteria in CP4 against which the scheme can be<br />

considered. These are criteria (i) and (vi);<br />

• the scheme fails the tests of criteria (i) because the development is not<br />

necessary to meet the needs of the industries listed in the policy and the<br />

scheme has not demonstrated how (if at all) it will help to support a<br />

sustainable rural economy.<br />

• in respect of criteria (vi) the scheme fails because there is no requirement<br />

for social and economic regeneration in this area. Further, no evidence<br />

has been supplied as to how it will support such regeneration. The extent<br />

and quality of such evidence must mean something more than modest<br />

increase in employment and expenditure in the local economy or else the<br />

policy would not act as a meaningful constraint on development in this<br />

area. It is a policy allowing exceptions and there is nothing exceptional<br />

about this development.<br />

127. In light of the above considerations, Test Two fails.<br />

128. Test Three: requires proposals not to conflict with the environmental<br />

protection and nature conservation policies of the LDF (final paragraph of CP4).<br />

129. Subject to appropriate mitigation and enhancement measures, the<br />

proposed development will not have a detrimental impact on ecology. The<br />

proposals will inevitably have an undesirable impact on the character and<br />

appearance of open countryside as explained in the landscape section of this<br />

proof. Noise is an environmental impact, the scheme causes noise and harm to<br />

the environment most notably the living conditions of the local population.<br />

130. In light of the above considerations, Test Three fails. Accordingly, the<br />

development fails to comply with policies CP1, CP2 and CP4.<br />

131. CP15 is a permissive policy supporting rural regeneration. It identifies a<br />

range of opportunities to support the economy of rural communities. The policy<br />

<strong>Hambleton</strong> <strong>District</strong> Council - Tim Wood – Proof of Evidence - 35 -

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!