Agenda item

A major outline application for the erection of 109 houses [Huntington and New Earswick Ward] [Site Visit].

Consideration was given to major outline application for the erection of 109 dwellings.

Roy Brown had registered to speak on behalf of a number of local residents and Huntington Parish Council. He advised that the land in question was considered to be Green Belt and also raised concerns about the arrangements for sewerage. He stated there are no available places at local schools and doctors surgeries in the area are at capacity and 109 extra houses would exacerbate these problems. He also referred to an increase in traffic in the area following the opening of the Vanguard shopping centre and the impact an extra housing development would have on traffic.

Felicity Paterson spoke as a local resident in objection to the application. She advised that residents are already experiencing traffic problems in the area and additional housing would further impact on the mobility of local people. The land at the site should be saved for any future improvements to the ring road.

David Trayhorn spoke as a local resident in objection to the application. He advised that he had been a resident of Avon Drive for 32 years and the issue of the Green Belt had been ongoing for at least 20 years. Residents had been led to believe that the site would be treated as Green Belt in order to clearly separate Huntington and New Earswick.

Robert Pilcher spoke as the applicant in support of the application. He advised that should the application be approved, much needed housing could be built on the site in as little as 8 months time with 30% of the housing being affordable. £200k would be made towards education provision. He referred to the Section 106 agreement and confirmed that landscaping would be included.

Councillor Cullwick withdrew from the Planning Committee for this item and spoke as Ward Member. He advised that the site had been rejected as suitable for housing on a number of occasions and there are other more suitable sites in York. He stated that the site does provide a Green Belt purpose. He felt that the potential traffic problems had been understated in the committee report by the Council’s highway team and traffic problems were a concern to residents in the area.

Members’ queried a number of points, in particular the existence of the water main at the site and the impact this may have on any future dualling of the A1237 and upon any landscaping at the site. Officers confirmed that the applicant would need to fully investigate the issue.

Members then entered debate and made the following points:

·        Some members considered that the application should be approved due to the need for more housing in York.

·        In reference to the issue of the site being in the Green Belt, some Members’ referred to paragraph 3.2 of the Officer’s report, which clearly stated that the site served the purpose of the Green Belt and was required to remain as such.

·        The site had been rejected a number of times as suitable for housing and the Officer recommendation was correct.

·        Some Members’ were concerned that due to the existence of the water main and the proximity to the ring road, the site would not work as a housing development.

Following further discussion, it was:

Resolved:           That the application be refused.

Reason:              Policy YH9 and Y1 of the Yorkshire and Humber Plan - Regional Spatial Strategy to 2026 defines the general extent of the Green Belt around York with an outer boundary about 6 miles from the city centre.  The application site is located in the Green Belt as identified in the 2005 City of York Draft Local Plan.  It is considered that the proposed development of up to 109 houses and associated infrastructure constitutes inappropriate development in the Green Belt as set out in section 9 of the National Planning Policy Framework.  Inappropriate development is by definition harmful to the Green Belt. No 'very special circumstances' have been put forward by the applicant that would outweigh harm by reason of inappropriateness and any other harm, including the impact on the openness of the Green Belt and conflict with the purposes of including land within Green Belt. The proposal is therefore considered contrary to advice within the National Planning Policy Framework, in particular section 9 'Protecting Green Belt Land' and policy GB1 'Development in the Green Belt' of the 2005 City of York Draft Local Plan.

                            The proposed development is likely to have a direct impact upon unknown buried archaeological features (undesignated heritage assets) within the site. No geophysical survey nor intrusive archaeological evaluation has been carried out to demonstrate that undesignated archaeological assets present on the site would be properly protected.  The application is therefore considered contrary to advice within the National Planning Policy Framework, in particular section 12 'Conserving and Enhancing the Historic Environment' and policy HE10 'Archaeology' of the 2005 City of York Draft Local Plan.