Agenda item

This application is an outline application for redevelopment of the site including demolition of the existing bungalow for residential development.

This application has been called in to committee by Councillor Ayre to determine the grounds that it does not comply with Policy GP1 of the City of York Development Control Local Plan. [Heworth Without] [Site Visit]

Members considered an outline application from Mrs Janet Wheldon for redevelopment of the site at 3 Whitby Drive, which included the demolition of an existing bungalow for residential development.

In their update to Members, Officers presented an amended condition relating to the scale of the development that would be permitted on the site if outline planning permission was granted. They clarified to Members that the application had been submitted in outline, with the means of access being the only matter of detail to be considered. The application sought consent for the principle of development, with the submitted layout being indicative only. The application sought consent for the principle of development, with the submitted layout being indicative only. The maximum number of dwellings that could be erected on the site was five, due to highway restrictions.

Representations in support were heard from the applicant’s agent. In clarification to a Member’s question, he stated that the submitted layout showing five dwellings on the site was indicative. He stated that the site was well contained and that the indicative layout demonstrated that the site could be developed without causing undue harm to the amenity and privacy of adjacent residents.

Representations in objection were heard from a local resident. He stated that  residents considered  the site  to be greenfield land, and that development would have a detrimental effect on the local environment as well as on the amenity of the residents. It was also noted that the application might have resulted in a more positive response from residents if a more modest scheme had been submitted.

Representations were heard from Councillor Ayre, as Ward Member. He  considered the application contravened policies GP1 and GP10 of the Local Plan, and a number of other policies, because he felt that the quality of life for the residents was not being protected. This was because the boundary treatment between the site and the adjacent properties would not protect the neighbouring properties from noise and disturbance. He took issue with the description of the site as being  derelict and  considered it to be an attractive garden. He also objected to the proposal on the grounds of the local effect on wildlife and the loss of a wildlife corridor.

Members asked the applicant’s agent about whether a full application would be submitted, if the outline application was approved. He confirmed that a full application would not be submitted and that the current application was indicative, to show the potential for development on the site.

In response to Members, the applicant confirmed that if outline planning permission was granted, a detailed application would then have to be submitted, which would provide an opportunity for the impact of any scheme on local residents to be assessed. He re-iterated that the submitted layout was indicative of a quantum of dwellings that could potentially be accommodated on the site. In relation to a question relating to landscaping, the applicant’s agent considered that there would be an adequate distance from the properties to the boundary of the site. Additionally, he confirmed that the proposal showed five properties on the site due to highway limitations.

In response to a question from a Member relating to how the adoption of the road would affect the number of properties to be built on the site, Officers confirmed that the site could only accommodate more than five dwellings if the development was served by an adopted highway, which would require a new planning application to be submitted.

Members considered that the application constituted an inappropriate development of a residential garden (garden grabbing) and would conflict with Policies GP1 and GP10 of the Draft Local Plan.

RESOLVED:             That the application be refused.

REASON:                  The application site consists of a well established residential garden forming a valuable green space within the local area. Residential gardens no longer fall within the definition of previously developed land as defined by Planning Policy Statement 3 "Housing" (Revised June 2010), and are therefore no longer considered as a priority for development. It is considered that the development of the site would result in an unacceptable loss of a residential garden ("garden grabbing"), which would be detrimental to the character of the immediate residential environment, contrary to Policies GP1 and GP10 of the City of York Draft Local Plan