Residents in part of Harrogate flooded by new homes may refuse to move their vehicles off the street tomorrow in protest.

A modular building that acted as a developer’s office and has stood derelict for years is due to be taken away by the company Portakabin.

A traffic management company has asked people on Kingsley Road to move any vehicles parked on the street so there is enough space for the building to be transported along the street from its location on Hawthorne Place.

But Kingsley Ward Action Group, which was set up to protect green spaces from development, said some residents are so angry about the number of new homes and the way developers have acted they are unwilling to comply.

A spokesman for the group said:

“I will park my car legally outside my own house but as that is opposite the post box there is no way this size vehicle will pass.

“As for the rest of the street I doubt the vehicle will even get to me there seems to be a fair bit of anger over this.

Will there be enough room for the modular building to be removed on Kingsley Road?

North Yorkshire Council has issued a traffic order preventing waiting and loading along one side of Kingsley Road from tomorrow until Friday.

But the spokesman said many residents were unclear exactly where they could park and what was legally permitted.

Some 600 homes are being built in the Kingsley Road area after a succession of planning applications were approved.

Read more:

• Kingsley anger reaches ‘boiling point’ as another 162 homes set for approval
• Harrogate councillors approve sixth Kingsley housing scheme

North Yorkshire Council’s highways area manager for Harrogate, Melisa Burnham, said:

“We have worked with the traffic management contractor and Portakabin to ensure that any disruption during the removal of the building is kept to a minimum in terms of the location and duration of the temporary parking restrictions.

“The traffic management contractor has informed residents and we have been in close contact with the community to allay concerns and ensure they understand the minimal nature of the restrictions.

“In general terms, where temporary traffic regulation orders prohibit parking, contravention of an order can be enforced by parking services and obstructions of the highway by the police.”

Harrogate Borough Council’s planning committee approved two of three major applications in Harrogate this afternoon.

The 12-person committee gave the go-ahead to Tesco for its proposed supermarket on the former gasworks site next to the New Park roundabout.

It also granted permission for Persimmon Homes to build 162 homes off Kingsley Drive.

But it deferred a decision on whether to allow developers to build 53 homes off Knox Lane in Bilton.

Today’s meeting at Harrogate Civic Centre attracted protestors and an outburst that caused the meeting to be briefly adjourned.

Here is what happened.

4.50pm A significant day for Harrogate

The decisions made today will have a significant impact on Harrogate.

There will be 162 new homes off Kingsley Road, which has already seen extensive development in recent years.

Tesco will – could? – finally build its first Harrogate district superstore after first getting planning permission more than a decade ago.

And Knox Lane could still have dozens of new homes, depending on the outcome of two reports requested by the planning committee.

Those reports, and the final decision, are likely to come to the new North Yorkshire Council after it takes effect on April 1, rather than the current HBC planning committee.

It has been a lively meeting today, with calls out from the public gallery and repeated requests from the planning committee chairman for people to keep their cool, despite the obvious strength of feeling on all three proposals.

That’s the end of our live blog from the planning meeting. Thanks for following.

4.44pm Knox Lane decision deferred

Planning committee members vote unanimously to defer a decision over the plans for Knox Lane.

They will request new reports and information about ground contamination and overhead power lines.

4.41pm More reports needed

The council’s legal advisor says there seems to be a lack of confidence in the reports about land contamination and power lines.

He suggests a request could be made to do more sampling of the ground around the former railway to give more comprehensive results.

Cllr Windass is happy with that proposal, saying:

“I am concerned they have not tested in that area for fear of what they may find.”

Cllr Burnett proposes deferring the decision again for the reports they want.

4.36pm Will the plans be deferred – or rejected?

The planning committee is being advised that it can turn down housing applications for sites in the local plan if there are material concerns about the proposals.

Otherwise, a developer can take the decision to appeal because there are no planning grounds for the refusal.

Cllr Burnett calls for a debate over a proposal to reject the plans on the basis of a material consideration.

Cllr Robert Windass says he is concerned about the contamination on site from the former railway. He calls for a full, independent survey of the entire site.

“I will not vote for this scheme until I know that that land is safe.”

Cllr Marsh refers to information about links between power cables and childhood leukaemia, asking HBC officers to look into that issue.

Cllr Burnett says to defer the plans for further information, the committee needs to be specific about the information it wants. Alternatively, to reject the plans, strong reasons need to be given.

She says a survey of contamination has been carried out, but Cllr Windass says it is paid for by the developer and he wants the council to request an independent survey.

A council officer says the council does not usually bear the expense of a survey, but the reports provided by the developer are assessed by the council’s experts.

Cllr Paraskos says he is not satisfied with the response on the cumulative effect on the roads of two developments close to each other. He’s told it was considered as part of the local plan, before the sites were allocated.

Trying to bring the discussion to a conclusion, Cllr Burnett asks if the proposal is to defer the application for more information about the impact of power lines and the potential site contamination.

4.28pm Knox Lane houses rejected

Councillors have voted by seven votes to two against the plans, with one abstention.

There are cheers from the public gallery.

4.26pm Councillors begin to debate

Committee chairman Cllr Rebecca Burnett moves to support the officer recommendation to defer the application for planning officers to approve, and is seconded by Cllr John Mann.

However, to applause from the public gallery, Cllr Nigel Simms says:

“I’m sorry to disappoint, but I didn’t agree with this site last time and I haven’t heard anything or read anything to change my mind.”

He’s backed by Cllr Marsh, who says the site – right at the end of a narrow lane – should never be described as “sustainable”. She asks whether anyone who voted for its inclusion in the local plan ever visited the site.

4.23pm Contamination, buses and power lines

A council officer confirms the environmental health team is happy with the level of contamination on the site.

Cllr Pat Marsh questions why the report says the site is “served” by local transport when the nearest bus stop is 490m away, outside The Knox pub. The officer replies:

“It’s served, but it’s beyond the optimum distance.”

The committee hears Northern Powergrid has no objections to the plans relating to the electricity cables across the site.

Cllr Andrew Paraskos asks whether the four reports paid for by the objectors were considered. He’s told they were forwarded to the consultees.

Cllr Marsh asks why Harrogate Grammar School and Rossett School are identified as target schools for children living in the area, when they are some distance away.

The officer responds that NYCC’s education officer has advised that HGS, Rossett and Harrogate High School are where the contribution from the developer should be sent.

4.14pm Questions over biodiversity

Council officers are now being asked about the situation with badgers.

There’s a long description of badgers’ habits and what that might mean for this site.

A council officer says the planned scrub woodland would be a good thing for local people, linking up with other natural space around the area.

4.09pm Developer’s agent addresses meeting

The agent for the developer is given the chance to speak.

He says the developer, Jomast, has worked closely with HBC officers to address concerns raised by the planning committee at the last hearing.

He addresses concerns over local badgers, power lines, and the size and number of houses, and says each has been addressed until HBC officers are happy with the plans.

“We politely ask you to endorse you officer’s recommendation and grant planning permission.”

Cllr Robert Windass queries where contamination samples were taken from and is told they were taken across the whole site, including close to the former railway embankment.

Cllr Andrew Paraskos asks about traffic management and whether two housing sites in the area have been included in the survey. He is told no, because it is not normal practice to do so, but the council must have assessed the area at the time the sites were allocated for housing.

“Can we talk badgers, please?”

The question comes from Cllr Victoria Oldham, who says “nobody wants their garden digging up by badgers” but she feels, as a protected species, they are having their environment changed and expected to move on during construction and then a newly-created scrub woodland provided for them after.

She asks whether the developer will work with local people to ensure badgers will be protected, and is told yes, as they are a protected species.

3.59pm Residents object

Local resident Stephen Redman says there is contamination on the site from when it was an active railway.

He says the impact of digging out the site would be significant in the area:

“How can 2.5m be removed without disturbing badges, trees or existing properties?”

Adele Laurie Wilson is now raising objections. She says the site is in a special landscape area and was recently refused permission to be turned into a garden because of its impact on this status.

Trees, many of which are under tree preservation orders, would have to be pruned and could be damaged by the process of construction. She says residents are “deeply concerned” about the impact on their homes.

3.53pm Local councillor speaks out

Cllr Paul Haslam tells the committee that 320 people have objected to the plans and residents have got together to have reports drawn up about the site.

Affordable housing is set at more than 50% and Cllr Haslam raises questions about the reasons for this.

The nearest bus stop is 490m away and other nearby sites will impact on this too.

He claims the biodiversity reports have been “a fudge” and he argues there would be the potential for flooding further down Knox Lane.

3.48pm Knox Lane plans

The meeting resumes and the Knox Lane plans are next on the agenda.

A planning officer explains changes have been made to the proposal since it came to the committee in the autumn. The house sizes have been amended and the total number reduced to allow more space between each building.

Knox Lane will be widened at the access point into the site.

There is an electricity pylon nearby with lines crossing the site.

Additional letters of objection have been sent to the council since the plans were last discussed. They include concerns about building too close to large trees, safety of children around electricity pylons, and the impact on local wildlife.

3.41pm Reaction to Kingsley plans

Our reporter Calvin Robinson has been speaking to some of the Kingsley ward residents who were at the meeting to object to the plans for 162 homes nearby.

After the plans were approved, Catherine Maguire, a local resident, said:

“They have blood on their hands. Someone is going to get killed with traffic and congestion. The construction traffic is going to turn into parked cars in the long term.”

Chris Watt, who spoke on behalf of Kingsley residents, said after the meeting:

“We are extremely disappointed that councillors chose not to listen to local residents. There was clearly no consideration of the traffic and parking in our area.

“We are grateful for the residents who objected to this proposal.”

Mike Gibbs, who also lives in the Kingsley area, said the plan will affect the “entire region” due to the additional traffic and congestion affecting ambulances to the hospital.

3.38pm Tesco plans approved

Councillors vote by six to four in favour of deferring the plans to officers for approval – in effect, granting planning permission to Tesco.

There is a cry of “absolutely disgusting” from the public gallery.

The meeting is adjourned again.

3.36pm Debate over plans

A motion is put forward to defer the plans to council officers to approve, subject to conditions.

Cllr Pat Marsh begins the debate by opposing the plans.

“This is not the best site for this supermarket at all. If you were on that road today all you heard was a constant movement of traffic.

“You put a roundabout in there and it backs up to the one at Skipton and Ripon Road…

“The impact this is going to have on the people on Electric Avenue is huge.”

She says the site is much more suitable for a park-and-ride site to help people get the bus into town, reducing congestion. She opposes the loss of mature trees as well as the arrival of additional traffic.

She says the impact on the Co-op and other facilities would be bad for the local population.

“If you empty that centre there, you empty the heart of Jennyfields.”

Cllr Watson agrees on the traffic concerns, saying it will also impact on the health of local residents. He is also worried about the gas pipe and petrol station in close proximity.

“One of these days, there’s going to be ‘boom!’.”

Cllr Philip Broadbank is also concerned about the loss of a Post Office for a population of around 10,000.

Cllr John Mann, however, supports the application because of the location of other supermarkets across the town. He says he can’t think of any major supermarkets in the north of town – though he is reminded Aldi is just over the road from the proposed Tesco site.

Undeterred, Cllr Mann says the area’s councillor, Cllr Webber, supports the plans. Experts have looked at the highways and other concerns, he says, and councillors should rely on their expertise.

3.27pm Questions over biodiversity replacements

Cllr Burnett begins the questions to officers by returning to the topic of providing trees closer than 10 miles away.

An ecology officer responds that current policies are stronger than when the original Tesco application was granted. They allow HBC to ask for compensation for the loss of brownfield land.

However, the council does not operate “habitat banks” – it is up to the developer to find them, and the council to decide if they are acceptable.

“It isn’t about individual plants or animals. It’s about trying to reverse the overall decline of biodiversity since probably the Second World War.”

He agrees it would be better to have it closer, but HBC cannot dictate that.

Cllr Martin asks whether a condition could be imposed to require it to be closer than 10 miles away. However, a council officer says it would be difficult because of land availability issues.

The site being considered is near Stainburn, just outside Beckwithshaw, and is provided by a company called the Environment Bank under agreement with landowners.

Cllr Martin says he disagrees:

“Where the pain has been given through the application there should be some recompense there as well.”

3.19pm Safety concerns

Cllr Waton raises concerns about the high-pressure gas pipe across the site and the petrol station planned.

Mr Robeson said the “anoraks” of Northern Gas Networks have spent many months looking at the plans to ensure they were safe.

Detailed risk assessments will be carried out to ensure the site is safe.

3.17pm Questions for Tesco

Councillors put questions to the Tesco representatives.

Martin Robeson says the medical centre, barber and take-aways suggest the Jennyfield local centre is not reliant on the Co-op for its viability.

“It is a community hub more than it is a retail hub.”

Andy Boucher says Tesco would not commit to include a Post Office in a local shop if the Co-op closed because it could be some years in the future and the future viability of the Post Office is not yet known.

Cllr Tom Watson says no amount of planning will ensure lorries always arrive at an agreed time, and raises concerns about access and deliveries to the site.

Tesco’s representatives say there have been experts brought in by Tesco to think carefully and ensure the plans tick all the technical boxes. Delivery noise would be no different to that in the previously approved plans.

Mr Robeson responds:

“What we have done is increase the amount of acoustic screening on that boundary beyond what we originally thought was necessary. That bodes well for the protection of residents.

“You get it wrong in Harrogate and that failure will be reported in Bromsgrove, Newcastle, all around the world because you got it wrong.”

Cllr Victoria Oldham asks how residents have been consulted.

The Tesco representatives say it took place during lockdown and was well advertised and attended. He says there have been many discussions with the council too, to ensure its specialists on light, noise and other issues are given the chance to have a say on the plans.

Cllr Stuart Martin says some trees will be lost off site with replacements planted 10 miles away, and questions whether they could not be closer.

Mr Robeson says the important thing is to replace the benefit brought by the trees. There is “a lot of replacement tree planting” but to ensure no overall loss of biodiversity, an off-set will be made with improvements elsewhere.

Mr Boucher says 43 trees will be lost off site and all 43 will be replaced.

Cllr Martin repeats his question about the distance, to applause from the public gallery.

Mr Robeson says the detail has not been agreed and it will be a matter of condition.

“If we can provide it so it’s more beneficial to the people of Harrogate, that would be a benefit. I agree with you.”

3.04pm Tesco backs its plans

Andy Boucher from Tesco says the company has long wanted to open a large store in Harrogate.

He says officers have analysed the application in detail and it is “robust”. He says there is a business case for opening a small shop in Jennyfields regardless whether the superstore opens.

Martin Robeson, also from Tesco, says the only area of minor disagreement is over the impact on the Jennyfield local centre.

He says there is a robust agreement to ensure a shop remains open there, whether Co-op or Tesco.

“The number of deliveries that come into Tesco are managed, so we are not talking about dozens of deliveries every day – merely a small handful of them.”

There is a shout of objection from the public gallery which leads Cllr Burnett to remind people not to call out during proceedings.

2.59pm Councillors give their views

Cllr Matthew Webber, who has been called away on business, has sent a statement to say he has known the site for many years as a councillor and living a few hundred yards away.

He says the plans would reduce journeys across town to other supermarkets.

“A facility like this is long-needed.”

Monika Slater and Hannah Walker speak against the plans

Ms Walker represents the Co-op and says everyone agrees the Co-op would have reduced footfall if Tesco opened, impacting on the other local businesses.

The legal agreement for Tesco to open a new store if the Co-op closed “would not work”, she says.

Monika Slater says the new supermarket would bring increased congestion on Skipton Road, more HGVs and disruption for nearby residents.

“Lorry drivers may be able to look into the upstairs windows of the residents on Electric Avenue.”

Although the site is brown field, having been developed previously, Ms Slater says the area has become home to wildlife while it has been unused over the last decade.

There are no questions from planning committee members.

2.52pm Meeting resumes

Cllr Burnett reminds people to remain quiet during the meeting.

She moves on to the Tesco plans.

A planning officer from HBC briefly outlines the proposal, including a new roundabout on Skipton road, and says the application is for a store of about half the space of the one that was previously given planning permission.

She says the store will have a lower ceiling than surrounding houses and will have landscaping along its boundaries.

The existing high-pressure gas pipe across the site does not seem to have caused concerns for Northern Gas Networks, which has not objected.

The council has looked at the impact of the larger store on the local retail centre on Jenny Field Drive, including the Co-op.

“It’s the impact upon the local centre that’s important and not the impact on any specific retailer.”

Tesco would have to open a small shop there if the Co-op closed within five years of Tesco opening.

The proposal is recommended for approval, subject to conditions.

2.45pm Vote – plans approved and a scuffle breaks out

The committee votes by nine votes to two to defer the plans to officers, allowing them to approve them subject to planning conditions.

There’s an outburst from the public gallery. One woman says councillors will have “blood on your hands”. She refers to her disabled child who she says is being put at risk by the proposal.

There are sounds of a scuffle. Committee chairman Rebecca Burnett adjourns the meeting for a five-minute break.

2.43pm Amendment proposed

Cllr Pat Marsh calls to defer the decision while an independent traffic management plan for the whole Kingsley Area .

A council officer says he is uncomfortable with the idea of an area-wide assessment, because he does not think a developer can be asked for that beyond their own development.

2.39pm Debate under way

Cllr Nigel Simms moves to vote in support of the officer recommendation to approve the plans.

He says the solar panels and other measures are more than the committee ever asked for and should have been included in other sites.

Cllr Marsh speaks against the plans because of the impact on traffic and existing local residents, as well as education, NHS and more.

“I don’t think it’s right.”

She expresses frustration that more of the planning committee did not go on the site visit this morning, which she said demonstrated just how busy the area is already.

She said there has never been good road structure in the area and it should never have been included in the local plan.

Cllr Broadbank also says he will oppose the plans until there is proper traffic assessment.

“We’ve got an opportunity as we’ve exceeded the targets already to turn this one down.”

Cllr Tom Watson agrees the parking along the roads nearby witnesses this morning was already too much.

Cllr John Mann says while he understands the concerns over traffic and the concentration of development, the site is allocated in the local plan.

“To ignore both the local plan and our planning policies is not as a good planning committee should do. So regrettably I will be voting for this.

“I hear what colleagues say, I hear what the public has said, but it is a local plan which was voted for by Lib Dem colleagues in front of me in 2019.”

Cllr Burnett thanks the planning officers who have worked with the developer to get an improved scheme for the site put forward, meeting HBC’s planning policies.

2.32pm Questions over sustainability

The planning committee members have begun asking questions of HBC planning officers.

Cllr Pat Marsh says there are 700 homes in that area, all relying on the local GP practice.

“I don’t know how these people are going to get a doctor’s appointment.”

She questions why a new surgery was not included in the local plan.

A planning officer says the developer pays towards the NHS to provide local services, even if not on site.

In response to a question from Cllr Victoria Oldham, the planning officer says the development is “sustainable”.

She also says there are contributions to local schools, including Grove Road. Cllr Marsh says:

“You think Grove Road is going to take all the development from this area?”

The officer says it’s for the local education provider to deal with that, not planning officers.

2.28pm Agent says the plans are ‘right’

Agent Paul Butler speaks on behalf of the developer.

“We know we got it wrong with the first scheme. We’ve taken the last 18 months to ensure this time we’ve got it right.”

He describes the green areas, lower density of housing, and open spaces through the site.

Electric charging points, air source heat pumps and solar panels have all been included.

A cycle path will enable pupils to get to school safely.

“Can I please urge you all to judge this scheme on its own merits.”

Questioned on bus services, Mr Butler says the developer has spoken to North Yorkshire County Council and that there are bus stops within 400m of the site.

He confirms there has been no discussion with a local bus company about local services.

2.22pm Local residents object

Mr Barnes and Mr Watt speak on behalf of local residents who oppose the development.

They say they support the proposal of a deferral so an independent traffic assessment can be carried out.

Mr Watt says the plans take the number of houses “well over” the requirements for the area.

They say other developments are having an impact in the area that should be considered as part of the plans.

2.18pm Ward councillor speaks

Cllr Chris Aldred speaks as the local ward councillor:

“Every one of my residents in this ward is probably goingto be affected by this application today. That’s over 1,000 houses and over 3,000 people.”

He says the impact isn’t just when the houses are complete, but during the construction process. He says despite a lot of house-building in the area in recent years, there has been no increase in public amenity space or facilities.

“Kingsley has no churches, no large schools, no shops, no healthcare provision, no public park.”

He says he would like to see the developer consulting local residents about installing a “top quality” children’s park with an adventure playground that could be used by people from around the area, not just the nearest residents.

“We owe it to the residents.”

He calls for the decision to be deferred until more accurate figures for traffic can be produced – he says those quoted in the report “do not add up”.

Cllr Aldred says the whole of the Kingsley Ward needs assessing in terms of traffic and parking, with many cars being parked in the area by staff and patients at Harrogate District Hospital.

The closure of Bogs Lane is also discussed. Cllr Aldred says it could reduce rat-running in the area, but it could also force all cars from the new development out onto Knaresborough Road in the same area.

“You don’t have to pass this today. There is no need. We’re 260% ahead of the government target for housing. Let’s have a look at the traffic on all those roads.

“We haven’t looked at the entire scheme and how it’s all going to be interlinked. We need an independent scheme that highways will agree and that actually adds up.”

2.07pm Kingsley Road application

The committee hears an outline of the application, which is for a field included in the local plan.

A previous application for more than 200 homes was rejected on the grounds of over-crowding.

The current application for 162 homes includes a children’s play area and some grassed areas to the north.

Existing trees around the boundaries under tree protection orders will be retained.

The plans are for a mixture of homes of between one and four bedrooms. Some houses have garages or driveways, and there is space for on-street parking.

There would be a mix of renewable and traditional heating in the homes if they are given permission.

2.02pm Here we go…

Cllr Rebecca Burnett begins the meeting by saying there are a number of lengthy debates ahead.

She goes through some formalities about procedure, including asking people not to heckle from the public gallery.

Cllr Hannah Gostlow has sent a substitute, Cllr Philip Broadbank, to today’s meeting as she cannot attend. Cllr Sue Lumby has sent her apologies.

Other than that, the committee is complete.

1.59pm Ready to go

Councillors on the planning committee have taken their seats, as have representatives of the various applicants, and members of the public given a slot to speak.

We’re just waiting for committee chairman Cllr Rebecca Burnett to begin proceedings. The Kingsley Drive application is due to be discussed first.

1.55pm Public gallery filling up

The public viewing gallery is rather busier than usual for a planning committee meeting.

Kingsley Ward Action Group is by far the biggest organised group here, but there are a few others taking their seats too.

The meeting takes place in the council chamber, adjacent to the public gallery.

Just give minutes to go until it’s set to get under way.

1.48pm Kingsley residents oppose new plans

Residents in the Kingsley Road area say they have had enough of large-scale housing developments on their doorsteps.

Around 600 homes are already under construction or completed in the area after previous planning applications were given permission.

Today’s application is from Persimmon Homes and is for 162 homes in a field along Kingsley Drive.

Starbeck resident Chris Watt is set to speak at the meeting on behalf of the Kingsley Ward Action Group.

1.44pm Long-running Tesco plans

The decision over whether to grant Tesco planning permission for its supermarket at the junction of Ripon Road and Skipton Road is just the latest in a saga dating back more than a decade.

The supermarket giant was giving planning permission for a store at the site in 2012 after many years of debate.

At the time, Harrogate was the only postcode area in mainland UK without a Tesco superstore.

However, the company later announced it had shelved the plans as part of a wider national strategy. The former gasworks site remained empty.

The current proposal was put forward in late 2021.

1.36pm Protestors outside meeting

Residents from the Kingsley Road area are already outside the civic centre ready for the planning meeting to begin.

They may not all be able to speak during the meeting, but they want to ensure their views are heard by the councillors who will decide whether another 162 homes can be built in the area.

Read more:

• Decision today on Harrogate Tesco and two major housing schemes
• Kingsley anger reaches ‘boiling point’ as another 162 homes set for approval

The beeping sound of lorries and diggers reversing fills the air. Mud covers the street. Planning application notices hang like baubles from lamp posts.

Welcome to Kingsley Road, a once quiet rural area on the edge of Harrogate that has become a permanent building site.

Some 600 homes are at various stages of construction in the nearby area. Work started years ago and shows no sign of ending.

On Tuesday, Harrogate Borough Council‘s planning committee is expected to approve a sixth development – Persimmon’s application for 162 homes in a field on Kingsley Drive. Some locals plan to demonstrate at the council offices in the hope of persuading the Conservative-controlled planning committee to reject the scheme.

Gary Tremble, pictured where more development is due to take place.

Gary Tremble, who lives on Kingsley Road, is at the forefront of local resistance. He is a member of Kingsley Ward Action Group, which was set up in 2019 because “we soon realised we needed to work together”.

By his own admission, Mr Tremble is a “pain in the arse campaigner” who bombards councillors of all political colours with emails complaining about uncovered lorries, the state of the roads, road safety and anything else that concerns people who live in the area. He says some Greens and Liberal Democrats “have been helpful” but the bulldozers keep coming. He says:

“There’s a lot of anger on this street and it will get worse if people keep ignoring us.

“I have to take time off otherwise I get angry all the time. But then you walk out the door and see another truck going past at 40mph.”

The proposed road closure leading to Bogs Lane

The homes are being built in a residential area off the already-congested Knaresborough Road. North Yorkshire County Council has now applied to block the through-route on to Bogs Lane, which some welcome on the grounds it will reduce local traffic. Others say it will just drive more vehicles on to Knaresborough Road.

All you can see in the Kingsley area is houses.

Mr Tremble says:

“The main issue is there is no infrastructure. You can’t build several hundred homes with no community centre, dentist or shop.”

He says if the Persimmon development is approved and more green land between Starbeck and Bilton is concreted over, many people will have had enough and look to move.

Read more:

• Kingsley residents call for halt to new housing decisions
• Council recommends controversial Kingsley Farm homes be approved

Other local people feel equally strongly. Darren Long says:

“It literally feels like we’re given more bad news on a daily basis. It’s now seven years since construction started on the first Barratt’s development and it shows no signs of stopping. It’s so sad that this has been allowed to happen.

“We were so excited to move here in 2017. It’s miserable living here now. Living with the constant construction traffic, proposed road closures, one way systems and the horrific traffic.”

Peter Nolan, who has lived in the Kingsley area for 49 years, says Harrogate Borough Council “should be ashamed of the state they have let this once quiet area get into”. He adds:

“I’ve never ever in all my years had to queue half way along Kingsley Road in a morning but now I quite often spend 20 minutes trying to get out onto Knaresborough Road.”

Resident Dee Downton added:

“I am more concerned about the effect of the normal day-to-day basics that impact the everyday person getting to their destinations or commute to work, the impact on air quality because it’s just one constant traffic jam, the impact when ambulances can’t get through, the danger to pedestrians crossing because a gap in the traffic is seen and a vehicle acts quickly but fails to see someone crossing the road.”

Developers have targeted Kingsley because the land is allocated for development on the Harrogate district Local Plan 2014-35, which outlines where development can take place,

They say the schemes bring much-needed housing to Harrogate.

But those living in the area are less enthusiastic. Anonymous posters appeared on the street recently urging locals to legally double park on the pavement to prevent developers’ lorries from passing.

Mr Tremble says such anger is understandable because feelings are reaching “boiling point”.

Andrew Hart, a postmaster in nearby Starbeck, sympathises and says the action group is “doing their best to right a massive wrong”, adding:

“I am appalled with the never ending chaos created by the developments and road closures along Kingsley. The whole infrastructure was never designed for this number of houses.

“We have ended up with serious health and safety issues, lack of local resources and a gridlocked Knaresborough Road and Starbeck.”

Tuesday’s planning committee can be watched live on Harrogate Borough Council’s YouTube page here.

Fed-up residents living in one of Harrogate’s busiest areas for new housing have called a ban on open-top construction lorries – but the council says it has no powers to take action.

After years of disruptions from the building of 700 new homes, Kingsley residents last night called on Harrogate Borough Council to only allow sealed wagons in and out of the area, which has rapidly expanded in size and will continue to do so for years to come.

John Hansard, a member of Kingsley Ward Action Group, told a full council meeting that the authority had an obligation to protect residents from harm and that this has “fallen very far short of acceptable levels”.

He said:

“We are simply requesting that we are no longer poisoned by harmful and dangerous construction waste.”

However, Cllr Tim Myatt, cabinet member for planning at the council, said the authority did not have evidence that the dust was toxic and that a ban on open-top lorries could not be enforced.

He said: 

“It is a highly unusual practice to require sealed containers to transport items to and from development sites.

“This can not be retrospectively imposed as a planning condition and neither residents or members of the planning committee asked for this to be conditioned at the time of the application.

“Further, the local highways authority has informed the borough council that they would not be able to mandate the use of sealed containers.

“They believe the use of such can only be required for certain processes such as the removal of radioactive material and asbestos.”

Cllr Myatt also said housing developers had repeated their offer to clean roads and pavements in the area, but this was “vociferously opposed” by residents.

Read more:

• Plea for ‘moratorium’ on controversial 181-home Kingsley development
• Starbeck residents pledge to fight 181-home Kingsley Drive plans ‘tooth and nail’

Construction work in Kingsley began in 2019 and residents have long complained that not enough has been done to minimise disruptions to their daily lives.

There have also been complaints that improvements to roads, public transport, health services and community facilities have not kept up with the level of new housing in the area.

Around 700 new homes are already built or under construction, with hundreds more in the pipeline.

Mr Hansard told yesterday’s meeting that without action from the council, residents would continue to be left to “suffer the consequences”.

He said: 

“These wagons have continually polluted Kingsley Road over a three year period, causing potential long-term serious illness for residents.

“We reluctantly understand that the road has to be used for access to the construction sites, but this must not be at the risk to the health of residents.”

Plans to build 133 homes on Kingsley Road in Harrogate look set to be approved after being delayed due to badger surveys.

Redrow Homes won outline planning permission to build the development on appeal in August 2020 after it was initially refused by Harrogate Borough Council.

The company’s reserved matters application, which considers issues such as access and appearance, came before the council’s planning committee last month.

But the council delayed a decision after residents claimed there were more badger setts in the area than developers had surveyed.

As part of the application, the developer submitted two ecology studies that found there were four badger setts in the area but only one or two were still actively used.

A previous ecological study undertaken in 2019 by a different developer found no evidence of badgers.

Members of Kingsley Ward Action Group (KWAG) bought a trail cam, which is a camera that is left outside to capture the movement of animals.

Read more:

• Harrogate residents hope badgers will thwart housing scheme

• Badgers delay approval of 133 homes at Kingsley Road

They claimed their investigation found evidence of 11 badger setts, six of which were still active.

A report due before councillors at a meeting next week refers to a study on badger setts undertaken by Dan McAndrew, the council’s principal ecologist. It says:

“The report provided is comprehensive, thoroughly assesses the current position and provides acceptable mitigation. 

“There are no badger setts on the site and the development will not cause loss or disturbance to the main sett and will only involve the temporary closure under licence of a small number of outlier setts.”

It added that mitigation measures were already in place as part of the outline approval.

Council officials have recommended that the committee approve the application at a meeting on July 12.

The proposal will see 133 homes built on the site, of which 53 would be allocated as affordable.

Final approval for 133 homes on Kingsley Road in Harrogate has been delayed whilst more badger surveys are undertaken in the area.

Redrow Homes won outline planning permission to build the development on appeal in August 2020 after it was initially refused by Harrogate Borough Council.

As part of the application, the developer submitted two ecology studies that found there were four badger setts in the area but only one or two were still actively used.

A previous ecological study undertaken in 2019 by a different developer found no evidence of badgers.

Members of Kingsley Ward Action Group (KWAG) bought a trail cam, which is a camera that is left outside and captures the movement of animals.

They claim their investigation found evidence of 11 badger setts, six of which are still active.

Badger activity

Badgers and their setts are protected by law.

Developers must have a licence from Natural England to remove or modify a badger sett.

This afternoon, councillors on the council’s planning committee met to discuss a reserved matters application that dealt with the appearance and layout of the homes.

However, the four-legged mammals dominated the debate.

Read more:

• Harrogate residents hope badgers will thwart housing scheme

• Flood fears halt 61-bed Knaresborough retirement home

To the north of the proposed site are train tracks owned by Network Rail.

Dan McAndrew, the council’s principal ecologist, said most of the badger setts are more than 30m away from the site on land owned by the rail body.

Mr McAndrew said he was satisfied the developer had put measures in place to protect the badgers.

He said:

“Badgers actually do well in urban fringe areas, they are able to adapt to those conditions. The key issue is, where are the setts located and can they be maintained?

“The main sett will not be affected and will be left in place.”

However, John Hansard from KWAG said his group’s badger surveys were at odds with the developer’s surveys. He criticised the 2019 survey.

He said:

“If you know what you’re looking for, signs of badger activity were plentiful, clear and unmissable, so why were they missed or ignored?”

‘Somebody has got to speak for the badgers’

Both Sue Lumby, Conservative member for Coppice Valley, and Victoria Oldham, Conservative member for Washburn, cast doubt on the developer’s claims that badgers would not be harmed by the development.

Cllr Lumby said:

“Somebody has got to speak for the badgers and that’s what we are trying to do.

“This population of badgers would have lived here for generations. I’m very, very concerned why the 2019 survey didn’t find any badgers.”

Cllr Oldham added:

“On the assumption you do get licence from Natural England, what mitigation are you prepared to offer for remaining badgers to forage? You are going to put tarmac, concrete where they like to dig for worms, for setts. What are you offering? What wildlife enhancement will there be on this estate?”

In response, Mike Ashworth, on behalf of Redrow Homes, said

“A significant area of site will be undeveloped and landscaped, 30% of the site, a lot more than a normal housing estate. In there you’d have a combination of planting of trees, wildflower, shrubs.”

An unimpressed Cllr Oldham responded:

“Badgers don’t eat pretty flowers, they like to eat worms.”

Further surveys

Mr Ashworth revealed the developer received permission from Network Rail last week to survey the land above the site for badgers.

After councillors rejected the council’s recommendation to approve the scheme, committee chair Cllr John Mann proposed deferment pending the publication of the badger survey, which councillors agreed to unanimously.

A developer has lodged revised plans for 181 homes on Kingsley Drive after previous a previous proposal was rejected.

Persimmon Homes has lodged the fresh plan after Harrogate Borough Council rejected a development for 217 homes on the site back in August.

It is the third time that the developer has submitted a proposal at the location, which used to form part of Kingsley Farm.

The Kingsley ward area will eventually see more than 600 homes built, including developments at Granby Farm and 149 homes on Kingsley Road.

The new application would see a mixture of one, two, three and four bedroom properties built.

Read more:

• Council rejects controversial plan for 217 homes on Kingsley Drive
• Starbeck residents pledge to fight 181-home Kingsley Drive plans ‘tooth and nail’

Persimmon have also allocated 72 homes on the site for affordable housing.

The developer said in its documents submitted to the council that the scheme would help to “create a sustainable and mixed community”.

Residents will ‘fight tooth and nail’ to stop development

Last month, 100 residents packed into St Andrew’s Church in Starbeck for a meeting on the proposed scheme.

Three Persimmon employees attended, as did two highways consultants and a planning consultant, Paul Butler, who spoke on behalf of the developer.

(Left to right) Paul Butler (PB Planning), Graham Whiteford (Persimmon), Josh Popely (Persimmon), Cllr Philip Broadbank, Catherine Maguire (KWAG) and Chris Watt (Starbeck Residents’ Association)

Mr Butler told residents that the site is allocated for development in the Harrogate district Local Plan, a council document that outlines where new housing schemes can be built until 2034.

However, John Hansard, from Kingsley Ward Action Group, said residents “will fight tooth and nail” to stop it from happening.

He said:

“People lived here for decades and have had this beautiful view, how do you think they will feel [when it’s gone]?”

Harrogate Borough Council will make a decision on the plan at a later date.

A heated meeting in Starbeck last night saw local residents question Persimmon Homes about controversial plans to build 181 homes on Kingsley Drive.

The meeting was organised by Kingsley Ward Action Group, a residents’ group formed four years ago to fight the wave of housing applications in the area.

Around 100 people packed into St Andrew’s Church for the meeting, which was chaired by Liberal Democrat district and county council councillor for Starbeck, Philip Broadbank.

Three Persimmon employees attended, as did two highways consultants and a planning consultant, who spoke on behalf of the developer.

Planning consultant Paul Butler, from PB Planning, gave a brief presentation on behalf of Persimmon that outlined its latest plans for the site.

It’s the third time the developer has brought forward plans at this location, which used to form part of Kingsley Farm.

When it was refused by the council in August, Kingsley Ward Conservative councillor Nigel Middlemass called the scheme “the biggest and worst thought out housing site in the area”.

The new application is yet to be validated by the council but Mr Butler said it should be live on Harrogate Borough Council’s planning portal in March, when the public will be able to submit their comments.

The number of homes has been reduced from 217 to 181.

Mr Butler said the amended scheme offered increased open space, widened footpaths and more trees.

Traffic concerns

There were several questions about how the new homes would impact the already-clogged Knaresborough Road, with the plans not offering any significant changes to the road layout.

Residents queried the developer’s previous traffic surveys for the scheme, suggesting they did not give an accurate picture of how many cars use the area.

Resident Brian Souter said

“Four hundred potential vehicles on Knaresborough Road. Where do they go? The roads are not suited to more traffic.”

Ian Greaves said:

“Knaresborough Road is a total standstill and Bogs Lane is a rat run. You [the developers] don’t have to put up with this.”

Highways consultant Geoff Bowman, from Bryan G Hall, defended the methodology used by Persimmon.

He said:

“There has been very extensive surveys of traffic in the area. There is a perception that we are nasty developers and it’s dead easy to get through planning, but the highways authority are rigorous.”

Read more:

• Video contradicts Harrogate council’s claim about wheelie bins and recycling
• Cycling group to meet council to raise concerns about Otley Road cycle path

Local Plan

On several occasions, planning consultant Mr Butler reminded residents that the site is allocated for development in the Harrogate district Local Plan, a council document that outlines where new housing schemes can be built until 2034.

One woman was applauded when she said the Local Plan had been “forced” on the community.

“Residents do not want more development. We do not want any more. The Local Plan has been forced on us. When are our politicians going to do something about the Local Plan that forces homes on people who do not want them?”

Another resident said:

“We don’t need this. Since Brexit we’ve lost a lot of the population. We don’t need this amount of homes.”

Tooth and nail

Whilst Mr Butler and Persimmon focused on the nuts and bolts of the application, such as the types of homes and access, the opportunity to quiz representatives from the developer elicited strong emotions from residents.

John Hansard, from Kingsley Ward Action Group, said residents “will fight tooth and nail” to stop it from happening.

He said:

“People lived here for decades and have had this beautiful view, how do you think they will feel [when it’s gone]?”

Carl Good said:

“Are you pleased that you will upset so many people in this area? Do you understand us?”

In response, Graham Whiteford, from Persimmon Homes, said the developer was “fairly proud of this scheme”.

He added:

“All concerns raised by the council in the refusal have been addressed. It’s unusual for Persimmon to have this amount of green space.”

Photo caption: (Left to right) Paul Butler (PB Planning), Graham Whiteford (Persimmon), Josh Popely (Persimmon), Cllr Philip Broadbank, Catherine Maguire (KWAG) and Chris Watt (Starbeck Residents’ Association)

Residents near one of the main house-building sites in Harrogate have called for urgent road safety action after a lorry and car collided.

About 600 homes are due to be built near Kingsley Drive and Kingsley Road.

Kingsley Ward Action Group, which campaigns to protect green spaces in the area, is angry because it claims safety fears are being ignored.

A video showing last week’s collision, which led to the car being written off, prompted the group to write to highways authority North Yorkshire County Council.

The email said:

“We have repeatedly stated that Kingsley Road is not suitable for this type of heavy construction traffic.

“Only luck prevented this being even worse and watching the video should make you grateful you don’t have to risk living on this road.”

The council’s response, seen by the Stray Ferret, says extra traffic is “unavoidable” when developments are being built.

The council added it would “ensure that the concerns of Kingsley Ward Action Group are made known to the housing developers that are currently using hauliers for the movement of bulk materials” but the lack of specific measures has angered the group.

It replied:

“Your response to our grave concerns backed up with hard video proof does not fill us with confidence that you are in fact acting in our interests at all.

“There is a clear danger here.

“From the response we have had to this near tragic incident it is clear only a multiple fatality will actually have any impact on the current truck activity.”

John Hansard, a member of the group, told the Stray Ferret it wanted the council to enforce a 20mph speed limit for site traffic and take tough action against lorries with uncovered loads.

Emily Mellalieu, development management team leader at the council, told the Stray Ferret:

“We are conscious of the disruption to residents that inevitably accompanies large-scale residential development such as that in the Kingsley/Bogs Lane area.

“We are liaising with housing developers in the Kingsley Farm area about the impact of their operations and complaints received from residents, councillors and action groups.

“At all times, we place the highest priority on road safety.

“Concerns raised recently have been forwarded to the developers for their attention and we will continue to work with the developers to ensure operations are undertaken as efficiently and safely as possible.

“The developer was required as part of the planning process to produce a construction management plan to mitigate the impact of its operations.”