Agenda item

Members considered a Full Application, submitted by George Blades and Sons Ltd for the erection of one detached dormer bungalow with associated external works at Plot 4 (resubmission).

Officers updated that 6 further letters of objection had been received from neighbours and the issues raised were circulated at the meeting.

Representations were received in objection to the application from a neighbour who was also speaking on behalf of the immediate neighbour to the site. She raised concerns that applications had been refused on four occasions for this site on the same grounds and that they could not see that there had been any change in this application. She requested Members to refuse the application on the same grounds.

Representations were also received in support of the application from the applicants agent who circulated photographs showing the application site and neighbouring properties together with Local Plan extracts in relation to density. He indicated that he did not feel the application was out of character or that the proposal would lead to a loss of light to the adjacent dwelling. He explained that shrubbery, adjacent to the neighbouring property, would be removed and that this would improve light to the dwelling.

Representations were received from a representative of Wheldrake Parish Council who indicated that he was also speaking on behalf of a number of residents in the vicinity of the site. He stated that residents wished to retain the rural character of the village and objected to this additional development.

Certain Members raised concerns regarding the implications of a letter received from the applicants agent to Sub-Committee members relating to  the proposed appeal lodged against the Committee’s previous decision and requested  legal advice on its contents.

[as amended by East Area Planning Sub-Committee meeting on 14 September 2006]

A number of Members who had attended the site meeting, the previous day, indicated that the visit had now confirmed to them that the proposal would not be an overdevelopment of the site. Members also referred to the Sub-Committees minutes of 13 April 2006, when the previous application had been refused, and when concerns had been raised by some Members at the loss of light to a window at 15a Northfield. Members considered that, with the removal of shrubbery and a tree from the boundary, this objection would be overcome.

Councillors Smallwood and B Watson asked that their continued opposition to the proposal be noted. They indicated that they supported local residents objections to the scheme and the retention of the rural aspect of the village.

RESOLVED:That the application be approved subject to the conditions outlined in the report and the addition of the following informative regarding the use of the garages for the avoidance of any doubt.

This application site includes 2 bays and accompanying forecourt of the 3 bay garage block A on the north side of the site, as shown on Stuart Fletcher site layout plan drawing no. 1017A accompanying this application.

Consequently, this decision includes part of the garage block A and forecourt as part of the approved scheme for a dwelling on this site plot 4, notwithstanding Condition 20 attached to a previous decision no. 04/02009/FUL for three dwellings on the adjacent land dated 13 July 2004, which restricted the use of the garage to the three dwellings which were approved at that time.

REASON:     In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the proposal, subject to the conditions listed, would not cause undue harm to interests of acknowledged importance, with particular reference to the principle of housing development, visual amenity, density, residential amenity, education and open space provision. As such the proposal complies with PPS1, PPG3, Policy H3 and H4 of the North Yorkshire County Structure Plan (Alteration No.3 Adopted 1995) and Policies H4a, H5a, GP1, GP4a, GP10, NE1, T4, ED4 and L1c of the City of York Local Plan Deposit Draft.