Agenda item

Erection of Class A1 Garden Centre and ancillary food hall and restaurant, including outdoor display areas, car parking and landscaping (resubmission). [Fulford Ward] [Site Visit]

Consideration was given to a major full application, submitted by Dobbies Garden Centres Plc, for the erection of a Class A1 Garden Centre and ancillary food hall and restaurant, including outdoor display areas, car parking and landscaping (resubmission).

Officers referred to the following updates, which had been circulated at the meeting:

·        Officers update which confirmed that the Environment Agency had withdrawn their objections to the scheme subject to the imposition of a condition, that the Highway Agency, a précis of the letters received for Visit York, a nearby landowner and from an interested party objecting to the application. The update also referred to additional correspondence received from the applicant earlier in the year which had explained their desire to create an ‘environmental exemplar’ development with the erection of the first timber framed garden centre in the UK;

·        Email from the Local Member, objecting to the application on behalf of local residents and support the Officers recommendation for refusal;

·        Email from John Grogan, MP for the Selby Constituency, expressing support for the garden centre, which would be situated adjacent to an existing shopping centre, that it was unlikely to add to peak time traffic and the employment offered.

·        Letter from Charles Forbes Adam an adjacent landowner of the Escrick Park Estate expressing support for the Officers recommendation for refusal.

·        Letter from the Chairman of Visit York who whilst recognising that the site was currently designated as Green Belt believed that the key green and sustainable features offered by the applicant should allow the Committee to give special consideration to the proposals.

·        Officer’s response to a letter, dated 21 October 2008, sent to all Committee members by GVA Grimley, which referred to a number of omissions, and inaccuracies, which they felt, was contained in the text of the Officers report.

·        Plan showing the site covered by the original Fulford and Naburn Hospitals and that now taken up by the Designer Outlet.

Officers stated that the applicant had now confirmed that the development would generate 60 full time and 60 part time jobs and they went on to give an appraisal of the job situation in the city at the present time. They also reminded Members that the development was classed as inappropriate in the green belt as it did not fit with any of the categories which were acceptable so very special circumstances were required to justify the development. The key issue was therefore were there any very special circumstances and if so did they outweigh the harm associated with this development.

Representations were then received from a representative of the York Natural Environment Trust (YNET) who stated that the garden centre proposal would he felt be an inappropriate visual element in the Green Belt which would destroy farmland and an important old orchard. He felt that if permission were granted that it would set a precedent and he strongly requested the Committee to reject the application.

Representations were also received from the Chief Executive of Dobbies Garden Centres Plc the applicants, who explained why this unique site adjacent to the Designer Outlet had been chosen for a garden centre. He confirmed that the road system and public transport links already existed, that landscaping would exceed that which already existed. He also confirmed that he was aware that this was a sensitive site but that the available city centre sites were either too small or too constrained for their development. He ended by referring to the positive feedback received to the Dobbies proposals during public consultation undertaken at the Designer Outlet in 2007, to the proposed renewable energy systems to be used in the building and eco friendly products to be sold from the premises together with the educational benefits for visitors and school parties.

The Chair of Fulford Parish Council also made representations in objection to the scheme. She stated that their principal objection was that this was valuable green belt land which on the southern approach to the city on which retail development and a car park would be inappropriate.  She confirmed that there might well be economic benefits but that the Parish Council did not consider that this constituted special circumstances or outweighed the harm that would be caused.

Members commented and questioned the following points:

·        The basis on which sales of core horticultural products were expressed if this should be financial or by the % of goods sold;

·        Requested details of Council and Inspectorate decisions listed in paragraph 4.19 of the report and to how relevant they were in relation to the application;

·        The mitigation measures proposed for the 400 space car park;

·        Requested details of other sites examined by the applicants;

·        Concern that the goods to be sold were largely not directly related or ancillary to horticultural purposes;

·        Questioned the value and life expectancy of trees in the existing orchard on site

Members confirmed that they welcomed the application from Dobbies for a quality retail development, which would create jobs in the city but stated that employment generation could not be classed as a very special circumstance, which would override its inappropriateness in the green belt.

Certain Members pointed out that garden centres were often sited on the periphery of cities and that access to this site was already in place, which included public transport. They stated that it had been reported that the orchard had not been well managed and that no mature trees would be lost to this development. It was then moved by Cllr Horton and seconded by Cllr Galvin that the application be approved subject to the imposition of conditions. On being put to the vote the amendment was lost.

Following further discussion it was

RESOLVED:             That the application be refused.

REASON:    1. The development represents inappropriate development within an area of Green Belt. The Council considers that there are no very special circumstances that would outweigh the presumption against such development. As such the proposal is contrary to guidance with Planning Policy Guidance Note 2 (Green Belts), and the Council's Development Control Local Plan Policy GB1 which states that development will only be granted for development where the scale, location and design would not detract from the open character of the Green Belt, it would not conflict with the purposes of including land within the Green Belt, and it would not prejudice the setting and special character of York, and is for one of a defined list of purposes  (none of which include garden centres).

2.  The proposal would result in the loss of a significant number of trees from within and along the southern boundary of the site, which would reveal views of the existing York Designer Outlet development and of the new development proposed as part of this application. The replacement planting would not adequately compensate for this loss, and as such the development is considered to be contrary to policy NE1 of the Council's Development Control Local Plan which states that trees or woodland that are of amenity value will be protected by, inter alia, refusing development proposals which will result in their loss or damage. The development is also contrary to PPG2 and Local plan policy GB1, in that the loss of the screen planting will adversely affect the openness and character of this part of the York Green Belt.