Agenda item

A major outline application for the erection of 14 dwellings. [Acomb Ward] [Site Visit].

Consideration was given to a major outline application by Novus Investments Ltd for the erection of 14 dwellings.

Officers provided a brief update to the committee report, full details of which are attached to the online agenda for information, the main points were as follows:

·        The Council’s Highway Network Management no longer raised objections following the receipt of an amended plan which introduced a footpath to the site frontage. They also sought sustainable transport measures through the Section 106 agreement.

·        The Council’s housing department objected to the lack of affordable housing being proposed.

Marcus Offer had registered to speak on behalf of The Friends of Knapton Lane Woodlands. He advised that he represented over 50 households and while many of the households enjoyed views of the woodlands, the main concern was regarding the removal of the site from the draft Green Belt, should the application be approved. He referred to the North Yorkshire Green Belt Local Plan Inquiry in 1994 in which the Inspector considered the site should be included in the Green Belt and reminded Members that the latest available draft of the Local Plan still shows the site as Green Belt.

Tony Chalcroft had registered to speak also on behalf of The Friends of Knapton Lane Woodlands. He referred to the applicant’s assertion that the area to be cleared had low ecological significance and the fact that the Council’s Ecology officer had refuted this. He advised that the woodland is valued locally and that a number of species including hedgehogs, amphibians and bats have been noted at the site.

Robert Dick had registered to speak on behalf York Natural Environment Trust (YNET). He advised that YNET concur with the comments made by the Officers in the committee report in relation to Ecology. He referred to the Ash trees which had withstood many years on the site and considered that they should be protected. He also raised concerns about the displacement of water should the site be built on and the impact this could have on nearby wetlands.

Simon Grundy spoke as the agent in support of the application. He advised that in his opinion, cities require room to grow and that greenfield land is required for development. In relation to the site he advised that as there was development on 3 sides already; this application would round it off the site. He felt that the site did serve  a green belt  function and was of little ecological  importance. The development would be a small scale housing development in keeping with the area and in his opinion, would have minimum impact.

Members queried a number of points with the applicant’s agent, in particular why the applicant did not accept that the site was considered to be green belt and why he felt it had no relevance. The applicant advised that in relation to green belt he felt the site did not serve any of the purposes of the green belt. In terms of the site having no relevance he advised that his comments related to the ecology and the fact that the planning assessment undertaken had found no evidence of any important species, including bats.

Members entered debate and felt that they had heard no reason to persuade them to vote against the Officer’s recommendation.

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 site is identified as Green Belt in the City of York Draft Local Plan Fourth Set of Changes ( April 2005). It is considered that the proposed development constitutes inappropriate development in the Green Belt as set out in section 9 of the National Planning Policy Framework which is by definition harmful to the Green Belt. The considerations put forward by the applicant (namely contribution to unmet housing need; creation of jobs in construction; built development on three sides of the site; provision of robust landscape buffer) do not clearly outweigh harm by reason of inappropriateness and any other harm,( such other harm being the impact on the openness of the Green Belt and conflict with the purposes of including land within Green Belt, character and appearance of the area, loss of trees covered by a tree preservation order, ecology and  access arrangement), and therefore do not amount to very special circumstances. The proposal is therefore considered contrary to advice within the National Planning Policy Framework, in particular section 9 'Protecting Green Belt land', guidance within National Planning Practice Guidance (March 2014), in particular the section 'Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment', and Policy GB6 of the City of York Draft Local Plan Fourth Set of Changes (April 2005).