CASE NUMBER 98/02185/CROWND
GRID REF: EAST 420300 NORTH 457500

DATE RECEIVED 29 Jun 1998
8 WEEK DATE 24 Aug 1998
WARD LOWNID

APPLICANT Ministry Of Defence

AGENT Defence Lands Service (North)

PROPOSAL
Erection of security fencing.

LOCATION
RAF Menwith Hill Menwith Hill Harrogate North Yorkshire

REPORT
SITE AND PROPOSAL
This proposal at RAF Menwith Hill is for additional perimeter fencing around the western, northern and eastern boundaries of the Station to link up with the enhanced security fencing which has been carried out as part of approved works to the south of the Station. In all cases, the fences will be closer to the external boundaries than the existing fence but in most cases, this is offset by the fact that for much of its length, the new fence will be screened by existing tree cover or hedges which it is intended will be supplemented by additional planting.

The exception to the above, is clearly where the fence leaves the eastern and western boundaries to join with the southern boundaries and in the north western and north eastern corners where the original proposal is for the new fence to run alongside the existing public footpaths.

The general detail of the fence is that it is to be approximately 2.4 metres high Weldmesh, topped by 73Omm diameter coils of 'concertina' wire.

To the rear of the fence, mounted on approximately 8 metre high columns it is proposed to erect 17 CCTV monitoring cameras.

In support of the proposal, the MOD have submitted the following information:

NEED FOR THE FENCE

• The purpose of the proposed perimeter security fence and associated measures is to reduce vulnerabilities and lower future risks to facilities and personnel.

• At present, the Northern (Top of the Hill) area of the Station lacks adequate physical security protection to deter, detect and prevent unauthorised access to Mission support buildings and family housing units.

• The addition of security fencing at RAF Menwith Hill has been validated through several security agencies and will compliment existing physical security features, police patrols and security awareness training efforts.

• It is proposed to upgrade the security fencing which will be located either behind the existing perimeter hedge or within the site. These measures apply over the majority of the length of the fence and radically reduce the visual impact upon the local enviromnent. Additional landscaping work will also be carried out, as shown on the drawing, in order to soften the appearance of the fence.

• The fence will be alarmed and monitored by CCTV cameras, mounted on 8m columns, spaced at regular intervals. There will be no security lighting on the fence.

• The fence has been located to minimise the need to remove trees and hedgerows.

• The proposed landscaping works will result in a noticeable increase in the level of tree planting on the station.

• Where the branches of trees need to be removed qualified tree surgeons will be utilised.

• A protection plan for the wild orchids in the North West comer of the site will be enforced including identification of type and location, constraints on the method of fence construction and detailed monitoring.

MAIN ISSUES
1. Need.
2. Effect on visual amenity/landscape.
3. Effect on amenity of public footpaths.
4. Effect on flora and fauna.

RELEVANT SITE HISTORY
None directly relevant.

CONSULTATIONS / NOTIFICATIONS
OPENSPACES SOCIETY - Object to extended militarisation of countryside - concem at degradation of public footpath and if unavoidable, should be a substantial distance away.
MENWITH WITH DARLEY PARISH COUNCIL - Menwith With Darley
BIRSTWITH PARISH COUNCIL - Birstwith
FELLISCLIFFE PARISH COUNCIL - Felliscliffe

APPLICATION PUBLICITY
SITE NOTICE EXPIRY: 31 Jul 1998

REPRESENTATIONS
Menwith with Darley Parish Council - No objections.

Birstwith Parish Council - No objections.

Felliscliffe Parish Council - No objections.

Otley Town Council - Object on visual and environmental grounds.

OTHER REPRESENTATIONS
At the time of writing the report a total of 48 individual letters of objection had been received, making the following summarised objections. Any further responses will be available for inspection in the Members Room.

1. Adverse effect on landscape.
2. Adverse effect on amenity of public footpath.
3. Adverse effect on orchids.
4. Inappropriate nature and design of fence.
5. Unsightly and intrusive security cameras.
6. Proposal should not be determined before resolution of future of orchids.
7. Unacceptable expansion of the base.
8. Intimidatory nature of proposals.
9. Effect on character of adjacent AONB.
10. Should be a Public Inquiry.
11. Loss of agricultural accesses.
12. Loss of trees and hedgerows.
13. Query lack of details regarding possible new main gate and fencing at opposite side of road from the base.
14. Lack of need given current political climate.

RELEVANT PLANNING POLICY
18C84 Crown Land and Crown Development
LPA01 Impact on the Enviromnent and Amenity
LPCO1 Conservation of Nidderdale A.0.N.B
LPC18 Extension of curtilages into Countryside
LPNC04 Semi-Natural Habitats
LPR11 Rights of Way
SPE2 Structure Plan Policy E2

ASSESSMENT OF MAIN ISSUES
1. NEED - The RAF Commander at Menwith Hill has provided a statement (attached as Appendix B) explaining the need for enhanced security at the base. In brief, the base is of the highest importance to this country's defence strategy; protester activity has increased in recent years and has extended to damage to equipment, which is a matter of serious disquiet to both the US and UK Governments.

Particularly in the light of recent incidents internationally, the Station has to guard against terrorist activity. The MOD and US authorities have agreed that a security fence around the perimeter of the site is required.

In relation to the section of fence at the north-east comer of the site, which is where the greatest environmental impact will occur, the diagonal location across the field is dictated by:

• the constraint formed by the public footpath;
• the desire to bring the playing field within the security fence;
• the need to encompass the Flusher Station (south of the playing field) as it has been subject to extremely costly sabotage; and
• the need to keep fencing 300ft away from the Pusher array in order to avoid adversely affecting its function.

There is clearly a strong argument that the proposed fence is needed and that there is no envirorunentally preferable location for it.

2. EFFECT ON VISUAL AMENITY/LANDSCAPE - See Landscape Appraisal attached as Appendix C. The proposals have been thoroughly examined by the Council's Landscape Architect. She has made suggestions for detailed amendments to the line of the fence and these have been agreed in all areas except the north-east corner. At the time of writing, an amended plan is expected which will show realigrnnent in the north-west corner to follow approxhnately the line of the existing fence. This will minimise the effect on the attractive wild character of this part of the site.

The Landscape Architect's view is that the diagonal route proposed for the fence at the north-east corner is unacceptable. This is because a diagonal fence would be an alien feature in a landscape made up of rectangular fields. Also, the fence would cross the field in a position where it would stand out in views towards the Station, particularly approaching from High Birstwith.

3. EFFECT ON AMENITY OF PUBLIC FOOTPATH - With the agreed amendment, there is no significant adverse effect on the footpath at the north-west comer of the site.

At the northeast comer, the fence would run parallel to the footpath at a distance of at least 10 feet. Landscaping to conceal the fence would be impracticable and would simply increase its adverse landscape impact. The fence in this area would adversely affect the amenity of users of this footpath, by intruding upon their experience of open countryside.

4. EFFECT ON FLORA AND FAUNA - There are said to be (although this is in dispute) rare species of orchid in the land between the existing fence and the neighbouring roads to the north-west of the base. Realigmnent of the fence to approximately the position of the existing fence should minimise the area of open land subject to disturbance. In the construction of the fence in this area, the Ministry of Defence should take advice from English Nature on the exact aligmnent and working methods.

CONCLUSION - The proposed fence will cause landscape harm and will harm the amenity of users of the public footpath at the north-east of the site. However, a practical alternative allignment does not appear to exist. In view of the importance of the security of the base, my advice is that no objection should be raised.

It is important that the various minor changes agreed to the alignment are followed through (they will sometimes require assessment on site as the route is pegged out) and that every effort is made to mitigate any potential effects on rare plant species.

CASE OFFICER - Mr C. F. Brown

RECOMMENDATION
That the application be Subject to NO OBJECTIONS with OBSERVATIONS as follows:-

01 The following steps should be taken:

a) Realignment in the north-west corner in accordance with the amended plan received on 17.8.98

b) The MOD should take advice from English Nature or other experts on the mitigation of any potential adverse impacts on rare plant species in the north-west corner.

c) Liaison should take place with the Council's Landscape Architect on the detailed alignment in certain areas.

d) There should be no landscape planting in the field at the north-east.

e) Existine, hedgerows should be reinforced with extra planting as defined in the Landscape Architect's assessment.

Back to the CAAB Home Page - supported and maintained by: