Agenda item

Erection of dormer bungalow revised access and creation of parking and turning area. [Rural West York Ward] [Site Visit].

Members considered a full application from Professor J Jones for a erection of  a dormer bungalow, revised access and the creation of parking and turning area.

The Case Officer advised Members that an objection had been received from the Drainage team. They had reported that Rufforth had suffered from flooding including both foul and surface water. They advised that, as the proposed method of surface water disposal was via soakaway, this should be shown to work through an appropriate assessment carried out under BRE Digest 365, carried out in wet weather, to prove that the ground has sufficient capacity to accept surface water discharge and to prevent flooding of the surrounding land and the site itself. The applicant must prove that no adverse effects would arise from the proposal however insufficient information had been received from the applicant to determine this. The Planning Officer proposed that, as this was not a matter that could be conditioned, this be added as an extra reason for the officer recommendation of refusal of the application.

Representations were received from the Agent, in support of the application. He advised Members that that there had been notable changes in this part of the village over recent years. He stated that the plot was not considered an  important space within the street scene and that, in his opinion, views would not be adversely affected. He stressed that this was a small scale development with only 2 bedrooms and sufficient space for a useable garden. He pointed out that there had been no objections from Highways regarding the access road and spoke briefly about methods of drainage.

Members commented that, having visited the site, there didn’t appear to be an  evident plot for an additional residential dwelling and also expressed concerns over exacerbating the existing drainage problems in Rufforth.

RESOLVED:             That the application be refused ¹

REASON:                  1.         The introduction of this property to this constrained driveway site would be out of character with the existing spaces around  surrounding properties towards the edge of Rufforth village and would create an awkward relationship with Highfield House. It would result in the loss of separation gaps and create a more dense pattern of development which would be out of character with the semi rural pattern of development . The proposal would therefore be contrary to Policies GB2, GP10 and GP1 of the City of York Development Control Local Plan 2005 and guidance issued in the Rufforth Village Design Statement. The proposal would also be contrary to national guidance issued in PPG 2 'Green Belts' and PPS 1 'Delivering Sustainable Development'.

                                    2          Approval of the property would involve the creation of a new residential access link within the designated Green Belt , outside the Defined Settlement Limit which would be contrary to Policy GB1 of the City of York Development Control Local Plan 2005 and guidance contained within PPG2 'Green Belts'.

                                    3          Rufforth has suffered from flooding and drainage problems. Insufficient information has been submitted to show that the proposed soakaway method of surface water would be acceptable and would not exacerbate existing problems. This is contrary to PPS 25 and Policy GP 15A of the City of York Development Control Local Plan 2005.