Background Part of the BH3 site has been promoted for allocation by ...

Examination Statement
Further information in support of DPD policy BH3 – Land SE of Aiskew
Yuill Homes
This statement provides some information in support of the allocation of Site BH3, South
East of Aiskew, to assist in considering the questions raised in relation to phasing and
access.
Background
Part of the BH3 site has been promoted for allocation by Yuill as developer for many years,
including to the previous Local Plan Inquiry, where the Inspector deemed it to be a suitable
site for housing. However it remained unallocated due to availability of sufficient sites
elsewhere. A plan showing the part of BH3 controlled by Yuill is shown at Appendix 1. The
remainder of BH3 comprises the former Hatchery, which is split from the Yuill area by Blind
Lane, a public right of way which is not adopted by the Highways Authority.
Question: Is the phasing of both BH2 and BH3 justified in terms of
brownfield/greenfield status and are they deliverable as phased given the
different ownerships Could the detailed access requirements, i.e. the loop
layout and provision of access to the neighbouring site, BM2, be implemented
Brownfield/Greenfield
1. It should be pointed out that paragraph 1 on page 26 states that the western part of BH3
is in agriculture (pasture) use. This is not the case. Approximately one third of the Yuill
area is a former nursery (with associated areas of hardstanding, structures, tracks etc.).
There is a disused former tennis court (hardstanding), and the remainder is disused
grassland. It has not been put to any agricultural use for many years. Since the DPD was
submitted to the Secretary of State, an additional area of land has been made available to
Yuill at the 2 nd access point. This fronts the road and comprises 4 holiday cottages and one
residential cottage. These are brownfield uses.
2. There are not many sizeable brownfield options in Aiskew, and indeed none of the
alternatives suggested for earlier release are wholly brownfield (or even 50% brownfield) in
area. The proposed phasing therefore suggests the most sustainable option overall, when
considering other sustainability matters such as proximity to local amenities and services.
The phasing also considers access and deliverability issues, as set out below.
Phasing
3. Given that there are several site allocations in Aiskew that abut each other, it was
suggested that a master plan approach be taken, in order to provide for a properly planned
approach to the development of BH2/BH3, where a significant chunk of the housing
numbers will be delivered. At the request of the Council, Yuill produced a broad master
plan to show how the sites could link together in planning terms.
3. The phasing of the sites reflects the master plan approach. Paragraph 3 of the Allocations
document states:
For reasons of access and residential amenity, development should take place first, if
possible [my emphasis], on the area of land currently occupied by Aiskew House Farm,
utilising the existing access for Aiskew House Farm direct from the A684….

Upon completion of this area of the site, the remainder will then be developed. A further
access will be gained by the second access point to the A684 through the existing frontage
of the former Cartman’s Nursery, as indicated on Diagram BH2/BH3/BM2. The details of
this should be agreed between the developer and NYCC Highways prior to any
development taking place. Potential access from the site into site BM2 adjacent should also
be accommodated and agreed with NYCC Highways.
(It is assumed that the last sentence refers to provision of an access from site BH2 into
BM2).
4. The above is reflected in policy BH2 and BH3, point ii. of which states that Site BH3 will be
delivered in Phase 1 (up to 2016) and Phase 2. Yuill do not interpret this as meaning that
the development of BH3 must proceed rigidly in a west-east direction following the
completion of BH2, but rather that it is preferred for development to occur on BH2 first, if
possible, to get rid of an existing amenity problem. The wording of the policy, in our
interpretation, allows for an earlier release of the Yuill controlled part of BH3 if necessary to
aid delivery, which is why Yuill supported it. The development of the Yuill part is not reliant
upon completion of the Hatchery or BH2, because a second (independent) access point
directly into the Yuill land is clearly set out in the DPD.
5. If any suggestion on improving soundness could be made, it is that the policy BH2/BH3 and
supporting paragraphs 3 and 4 be reworded to provide a little more clarity on this matter,
and also to provide flexibility to allow later-phased sites to be brought forward in the event
of lack of delivery. Delivery would be reviewed annually in the SHLAA/AMR.
6. Questions have been raised on the question of access to the Hatchery area of BH3 and to
the Pig Farm at BH2. At present, we believe there is no legal right of access (for
development) to the Hatchery along Blind Lane, and we believe it will have to be accessed
either via the Yuill site (across Blind Lane) or via the Pig Farm. Both require negotiations
yet to be concluded, but it is our opinion that the policy phasing (with a little
clarification/flexibility as suggested above) allows for this issue to be dealt with.
7. A master plan approach to developing adjacent sites is sound planning policy, and this can
still be achieved in design terms even if they are split into phases with the middle section
possibly coming last. In this case it would be possible to take a pincer approach to
development, with the early phases designed both to be stand-alone developments or parts
of a potentially larger overall development.
8. In terms of access, our transport consultants, White Young Green, held discussions with
NYCC during the LDF promotion. These culminated in submission in 2007 of access design
options to NYCC. These demonstrated that a satisfactory access from the A684 can be
achieved at the western part of BH3, at the second access point. The options for this
include a simple priority junction, mini-roundabout or traffic signal controlled junction. All
are possible on land controlled by Yuill and all are equally acceptable to Yuill. An email from
NYCC Highways confirmed that access geometry is not an issue, and this is shown at
Appendix 2.
9. It should be noted that, since Submission, the owners of the cottages at Cartmans Nursery
(fronting the road) have decided they wish to leave when the development starts, so they
have also made this additional property available to Yuill. This provides further scope in
terms of the second access point. This is arguably the best point along the A684 for
accessing the development land behind.

10. Although any application would need to be accompanied by an up-to-date Transport
Assessment, it is clear that providing a satisfactory access point into the Yuill controlled
area of BH3 is not an issue. The master plan included a loop road arrangement, which was
advised by NYCC at the time as the most appropriate for a large development from a single
access point. The master plan was designed to ensure that the Yuill part could be delivered
either as a stand-alone development, or a first phase of a larger area, with potential
extensions to the loop road across Blind Lane to the Hatchery (in later phases), ultimately
joining up with the Pig Farm and BM2.
11. Yuill do not control the other areas of the master plan, or Blind Lane, which are in different
ownerships. However, it is our opinion that the proposed phasing policy allows for the early
development of the Yuill part of BH3 in phase 1, and time for negotiations with regard to
access to the Hatchery for development in phase 2.
12. In conclusion, given that the Yuill-promoted part of BH3 is suitable, available and
deliverable, and that access is not an issue, we believe that its inclusion in Policy BH3
phase 1 is sound.
* * * * *
APPENDICES:
APPENDIX 1: PLAN SHOWING YUILL LAND WITHIN BH3 AND WIDER MASTER PLAN AREA
APPENDIX 2: EMAIL FROM NYCC re. SITE ACCESS
Louise Nicholson, Planning Manager, Yuill Homes, Cecil House, Loyalty Road, Hartlepool TS25 5BD