Agenda item

Erection of entrance gates, 1 agricultural store, 1 field shelter, and shooting platform (retrospective) [Osbaldwick And Derwent] [Site Visit]

Members considered a full application from Mr Andrew Cole for the erection of entrance gates, one agricultural store, one field shelter, and shooting platform (retrospective) on the Land to the South Of Keepers Cottage, Intake Lane, Dunnington.

Officers advised Members that since publication of the committee report, the applicant had submitted a letter in support of their application, raising a number of points as follows:

·        The site was acquired for the development of an orchard and coppices for timber production with an area set aside or saddleback pigs, together with beehives. This land and other land held within the parish of Dunnington exceeds 5 hectares.

·        The field shelter and the storage shed are considered to be acceptable in the report

·        The gates fall within permitted development as they do not exceed 2 metres in height and they are 4 metres from the track. Officers noted that the applicant is applying for the gates that are in situ. Officers measured the gates and they were approx 2.35 metres in height and the supporting posts are a similar height. The gates are set approx 2 metres from the cycle track/Public Right of Way. As such the gates do not fall within permitted development rights and do require planning permission.

·        The height of the shooting tower is required for safety. The rifles are moderated/silenced therefore do not cause disturbance to the public. The applicant states that the number of deer killed in 2017 is 6.

·        The site is fenced and hedged and on three sides the hedge (heights vary between 2 and 5 metres) restricts access by deer. The boundary within Hagg Wood is fully fenced to a height of 1.5 metres. The boundary to Keepers Cottages is hedged to 1.5 metres in height.

·        The applicant does not wish to increase the height of the boundary and this would impact on the residents of Keepers Cottage.

·        The site is not deer proofed, and he does not consider that a site can be fully proofed. He goes onto state that an ‘over proofed site’ would lead to damage to crops from any animals that did access the site then being unable to exit

·        The current position of the shooting platform allows maximum safe field of fire of the greatest extent of the site, the tower is located at the bottom of a slope and the applicant considers that it appears lower in height. The platform has been positioned behind the storage shed to reduce its appearance and the materials used are considered to be sympathetic. Willow trees have been planted to obscure the platform from view.

·        The applicant considers that the building falls within permitted development rights. Officers advised that the shooting platform   is not considered to fall within confines of permitted development.

·        The shooting platform is necessary for farming purposes. Officers advised that the shooting tower is not reasonably required for agricultural purposes, the fruit trees do not have protective fencing and there are number of fencing options that would prevent damage to trees from deer.

In response to a Member query it was clarified that the 5 metres referred to by the applicant included the land adjacent to the site that had been purchased by the applicant.

Cllr Warters, Ward Councillor for Osbaldwick and Derwent, spoke in support of the application. He stated that the field gate and regulated shooting were necessary. He added that without the platform, shooting on land would damage the trees.

Following discussion, it was:

Resolved:  That the application be refused.

Reasons:

                             i.        The application site is within the general extent of the Green Belt as set out in Policy Y1 of The Yorkshire and Humber Plan - Regional Spatial Strategy. In accordance with paragraph 89 of the National Planning Policy Framework it is considered that the proposed development constitutes inappropriate development which, according to Section 9 of the Framework is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances. The proposal conflicts with the essential characteristics of Green Belts (their openness and their permanence) and the purposes of including land within the Green Belt by resulting in encroachment of development into the countryside, and is harmful to the openness of the Green Belt. The Local Planning Authority has carefully considered the justification put forward by the applicant in support of the proposals but has concluded that these considerations do not clearly outweigh the harm to the Green Belt and other harm (visual amenity and character, and potentially residential amenity) when substantial weight is given to the harm to the Green Belt. As such very special circumstances do not exist to justify the proposal. The proposal is therefore contrary to Section 9 of the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy YH9 of the Yorkshire and Humber Plan and also conflict with Draft Development Control Local Plan (2005) policy GB1: Development in the Green Belt.

                            ii.        It is considered that the proposal would increase the dominance and presence of the built form on the land.  This would have a negative impact on the visual amenity of the area as the site is readily visible from the public right of way and the cycle path.  As such, the proposal would fail to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and would not respect or enhance the local environment, contrary to the core planning principle of the National Planning Policy Framework of recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside and Policy GP1 of the City of York Draft Development Control Local Plan (Approved April 2005) which similarly expects proposals to respect or enhance the local environment.

                           iii.        Insufficient information has been submitted with the application to properly assess whether the use of the shooting platform would be acceptable in terms of residential amenity.  In the absence of further information, the Local Planning Authority has been unable to properly assess whether the proposal would be in compliance with Policies GP1 of the City of York Development Control Local Plan (2005), and national planning policy set out in the National Planning Policy Framework. It is not considered that these matters could reasonably be addressed through the imposition of planning conditions.