Local democracy during coronavirus

During coronavirus, we've made some changes to how we're running council meetings. See our coronavirus updates for more information on meetings and decisions.

Agenda item

Rose Cottage, Main Street Holtby, York, YO19 5UD [19/02608/FUL]

First floor rear extension [Osbaldwick and Derwent]

 

Minutes:

Members considered a full application from Mr Rounding for the construction of a first floor rear extension to be built above an existing side and rear extension.  The proposal was a resubmission of an application (Ref: 19/02165/FUL) for the construction of a first floor side and rear extension, which had been withdrawn due to concerns raised about the impact of the extension on the Green Belt.

 

A number of photographs of the site were circulated, at the request of Cllr Warters, Ward Member for Osbaldwick & Derwent.

 

Representations in support of the application were made by:

 

a)   Matthew Rounding, the applicant, who stated that he wished to extend his family home and create an office to work from home.  The proposals had been scaled down from the original plans and were in keeping with the Holtby Village Design Statement.

 

b)   Peter Broadley, Chair of Holtby Parish Council, who said the extension was small and would have little impact on the appearance of the building.  He also noted that there had once been other buildings in the grounds of the property. 

 

c)   Cllr Warters, who said that the application would create a practical family home with a minimal increase in the volume of the building’s footprint, causing no harm to the green belt. 

 

In response to questions from Members, officers confirmed that:

·        The cumulative impact of incremental increases to the original building had to be assessed under the policy.

·        The definition of ‘original building’ did not include associated structures.

·        In their view, building an extension for improved living accommodation and homeworking did not constitute ‘very special circumstances’.

·        Harm to the openness of the green belt was not the only impact to take into account; the starting point was whether the proposed enlargement was disproportionate.

·        In this case, the volume of the original dwelling would be more than doubled, as explained in report paragraph 5.12.

 

Following a debate, Cllr Galvin moved, and Cllr Craghill seconded, that the application be approved, on the grounds that the contribution it would make to keeping young families in Holtby and to sustainable employment in the village constituted ‘very special circumstances’ that would outweigh the harm to the green belt.  4 Members voted in favour of this motion and 7 against, and the motion was declared LOST.

 

Cllr Crawshaw then moved, and Cllr Webb seconded, that the application be refused, in accordance with the officer recommendation.  7 Members voted in favour of this motion and 4 voted against, and the motion was declared CARRIED.  Cllr Fisher asked that his vote against the motion be recorded. 

 

Resolved:  That the application be refused.

 

Reason:     The application site lies within the general extent of the Green Belt, as set out in saved policies Y1 and YH9 of The Yorkshire and Humber Plan - Regional Spatial Strategy. It is considered that the proposed extension, when taken in conjunction with existing extensions to the property, would result in a disproportionate addition to the original dwelling, which would represent inappropriate development in the Green Belt.  It would cumulatively create a significant extension to the original property which would harm the openness of the Green Belt.  No very special circumstances have been identified that would outweigh this harm.  As such the proposal conflicts with the National Planning Policy Framework 2018 Chapter 13 (paragraphs 133, 134, 140, 144 and 145c ), policy GB1 of the Publication Draft Local Plan 2018 and policies GB1 and GB4 of the Development Control Local Plan 2005, which seek to restrict the size of additions and extensions to existing dwellings in the Green Belt in order to maintain openness.

Supporting documents:

 

Feedback
Back to the top of the page