Thirty acres of land valued at £5m on the outskirts of Harrogate has been sold.

Land agents Lister Haigh had been marketing the green fields, which are adjacent to Forest Lane and Forest Moor Road, as having potential for future development subject to planning permission.

The company said the location benefited from nearby commuter access to Leeds and York from Starbeck and Knaresborough train stations.

The fields between Harrogate and Knaresborough are designated as green belt land to prevent urban sprawl.

Current planning rules prohibit housing from being built on the green belt unless there are exceptional circumstances.

Other exceptions are for agricultural and forestry buildings and some outdoor sports facilities.

Read more:

• New Harrogate Station Gateway details revealed today
• Harrogate roads set for three weeks of resurfacing work

The land is not allocated in Harrogate Borough Council‘s Local Plan, which sets out where development can take place until 2034.

The fields are in the division of Liberal Democrat county and district councillor Pat Marsh.

Cllr Marsh said:

“The land in question is green belt and therefore protected from development. There are exceptional circumstances such as a sports pitch and the needs of forestry workers, other than that the only other reason would be lack of housing land and Harrogate is certainly not short of that. I am keeping a firm eye on the land.”

The government has rejected an appeal for a business park in Follifoot to expand onto green belt land.

Harrogate Borough Council initially rejected a bid to build two new buildings at Follifoot Ridge Business Park, which would have created space for five commercial units.

The development would have taken place on a small strip of land alongside existing units (pictured above), which were previously allowed because they were classed as farm conversions.

The site owners said the new units would help to meet demand from businesses for more space. Following the council’s refusal, Uffa Kirkby appealed to the government’s Planning Inspectorate.

But Robert Walker, the planning inspector who oversaw the appeal, said the harm to the green belt was not outweighed by the economic benefits of the scheme.

In his decision notice, Mr Walker said:

“Based on the evidence before me and for the reasons outlined above, I cannot be satisfied that the overall benefits clearly outweigh the substantial weight given to the harm to the green belt by reason of inappropriateness.

“I have come to this conclusion having regard to the importance that the government places on making efficient use of land and building a strong, competitive economy.”

Read more:

• What is green belt land and how would Harrogate look without it?
• Flaxby Park ponders next move after eco-resort plans refused

In June last year, the council’s planning committee said the proposal was “inappropriate” and harmful to the green belt.

However, ahead of the appeal, the developer argued that the scheme was not inappropriate and disagreed with the authority’s conclusion.

How the business park would look with the commercial units built on the green belt land.

The business park’s planning agent, ID Planning, said in a statement of case:

“The appellant disagrees with the reason for refusal based on the development being inappropriate as the site is not brownfield land.

“The appellant considers that the site is brownfield land but notwithstanding this considers the development comprises limited infilling.”

It added that the scheme had economic benefits and would not have an “impact on the openness of the green belt”.

“The development provides clear economic benefits set out in full in the planning statement and supported and acknowledged by the local planning authority which further support the appellants case for planning permission to be granted.”

The owners of a business park in Follifoot have appealed a decision to refuse permission to expand onto green belt land.

Harrogate Borough Council rejected a plan to build two new buildings on Follifoot Ridge Business Park, which would have created space for five commercial units.

The development would have sat next to existing units (pictured above) previously allowed because they were classed as farm conversions.

The owners of the park said the new units would help to meet demand from businesses for more space.

Kim Eastwood, a planning agent for the business park, told the council in June that the development would have little impact on the area because the green belt land is already surrounded by existing units.

However, the council’s planning committee rejected the proposal. In its reason for refusal, the authority said:

“The application site is not considered previously developed land. The proposal is therefore inappropriate development which, by definition, is harmful to the green belt and it would also result in some limited harm to the openness of the green belt.

“Although the proposal would bring economic benefits it is not considered that ‘very special circumstances’ exist that clearly outweigh the potential harm to the green belt by reason of inappropriateness and the impacts on openness.”

Read more:

• What is green belt land and how would Harrogate look without it?
• Longlands Common ‘can be an example to others’, says secretary

In its statement of case, the business park’s planning agent, ID Planning, said the development was not “inappropriate” and that it disagreed with the council’s conclusion.

It said:

“The appellant disagrees with the reason for refusal based on the development being inappropriate as the site is not brownfield land.

“The appellant considers that the site is brownfield land but notwithstanding this considers the development comprises limited infilling.”

How the business park would look with the commercial units built on the green belt land.

It added that the scheme had economic benefits and would not have an “impact on the openness of the green belt”.

“The development provides clear economic benefits set out in full in the planning statement and supported and acknowledged by the local planning authority which further support the appellants case for planning permission to be granted.”

A government planning inspector will make a decision on the plan at a later date.

It was first introduced in the 1960s to stop urban sprawl and protect Harrogate’s countryside from being dug up for developments.

The green belt is protected areas of rural land where the building of new homes and businesses is only allowed in special circumstances.

Its supporters say green belts have preserved landscapes across the country, while critics claim they protect the rich, stop houses being built and encourage commuting by cars.

But what would Harrogate look like if its protected areas of land had never been created?

36,000 acres of greenbelt

The green belt covers almost 36,000 acres across the district – equivalent to 11% of the total area.

It stretches along the district’s southern boundary with Leeds and up between Harrogate and Knaresborough to stop the two towns merging. There is also an area in the east of the district that forms part of the York green belt, which encircles the city.

Without the protection that the green belt offers, Harrogate and Knaresborough’s built-up areas – which sit just half a mile apart – could have formed one.

Other areas to the west including Otley and Ilkley could have also expanded ever-outwards and swallowed up the smaller settlements that surround them.

But the rules and regulations which make up green belt policy have not stopped developers coming forward with plans.

There have been almost 1,700 applications to Harrogate Borough Council in the protected areas since 2011. Most of these were for extensions and farm buildings, but others have been of some significance.

Read more:

• Follifoot business park refused permission to expand on green belt
• Longlands Common ‘can be an example to others’, says secretary

In early 2020, a developer behind plans for 210 homes on the outskirts of Wetherby near Stockeld Park was refused planning permission by both the council and a government inspector at appeal.

On the flip side, the construction of Harrogate Rugby Club’s Rudding Lane ground would not have been possible if the council did not allow for “special circumstances” when plans were approved in 2013.

These are just two examples of when development can and can’t take place in the green belt, with the task of deciding which circumstances are “special” enough to justify development often resulting in interventions by government inspectors.

Protecting greenbelt ‘a core principle’, says council

Cllr Tim Myatt, cabinet member for planning at Harrogate Borough Council, said the authority attaches great importance to protecting the green belt and that doing so is a key part of local and national policy.

He said: 

“Any proposal for development in the district’s two green belts – namely the West Yorkshire green belt and the York green belt – would need to be in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework, which makes clear that any development should not be approved except in very special circumstances.

“Protecting the green belt is one of the core planning principles of the NPPF and something our adopted Local Plan also specifies.”

The green belt between Harrogate and Knaresborough was reviewed in 1992 and minor changes were made when the district’s 2001 Local Plan was adopted.

However, the boundaries were not reviewed when the most recent Local Plan was adopted in 2020 – something residents in Harlow and Pannal Ash say should have happened.

David Siddans, secretary of Harlow and Pannal Ash Residents Association, said: 

“We would have liked to see the green belt extended to provide more protection to the landscape between Harrogate and Beckwithshaw.

“But that, we understand, would have required a formal review process, and Harrogate Borough Council was not receptive to the idea.”

Mr Siddans also said it is the development of greenfield land – not green belt – which presents the biggest threat to the environment and local area, which is facing the construction of hundreds of new homes.

Read more:

• Spofforth council appeals to Prime Minister over controversial housing proposal

• Government awards Harrogate £50,000 for housing on underused garage sites

He said these greenfield sites – which are untouched areas not previously built on – were seen as “easy pickings” when Harrogate’s most recent Local Plan was being developed.

Mr Siddans said: 

“When the Local Plan was being prepared and sites were being sought to accommodate around 16,000 new houses, all the greenfields around the western arc which were not green belt were targeted for development.

“No major developments are proposed on the existing area zoned as green belt west of Harrogate.

“However, greenfield sites do not have the same protection, except that those located around the western arc are all within designated areas of special landscape value.

“In practice, the planning authority pays little attention to this protection, hence the massive and highly intrusive developments currently being proposed.”