Agenda item

Outline application for erection of extra care sheltered accommodation, extension to Elderly Mentally Frail unit, residential development, relocation of existing bowling green and provision of new access road and car parking (revised scheme)

Members considered a major outline application, submitted by the Royal Masonic Benevolent Institute, for the erection of extra care sheltered accommodation, extension to Elderly Mentally Frail Unit, residential development, relocation of existing bowling green and provision of new access road and car parking (revised scheme).

Officers updated the following:

• A letter from the applicants agent dated 21 June 2007
• A letter and brochure from the applicants agent
• Two letters from Hon Secretary of the Connaught Court Masonic Bowling Club
• Letter on behalf of Fulford Friends
• Letter from Fulford Parish Council dated 25 June 2007
• Letter from York Green Party dated 26 June 2007

Representations were received in objection to the proposals from a nearby resident regarding car parking and the removal of a hedge, and he stated that the proposed bowling green would be unsuitable.

Representations were received in objection to the proposal from the chair of Fulford Parish Council. She stated that the proposal would mean a loss of unique parkland, which forms an integral part of the conservation area, the proposal infringes PPG 15, the impact on the A19 and the river, impact on views, and the proposal being an inappropriate urban development.

Representations were received in objection to the proposals from a representative of Fulford Friends regarding the conservation area. She stated that there was wide support from the community to refuse the application, and that the proposed development failed to meet statutory guidelines. The views both in and out of the conservation area would be affected.

Representations were received in objection to the proposals from a resident of Fulford Park regarding the impact on Connaught Court residents. He stated that the proposal would mean that views would be spoilt and privacy compromised, the security of residents may be affected, and there would be an increase in noise and pollution which would lead to a reduction in quality and privacy for residents.

Representations were received from a representative of Fulford Friends regarding the threat to the long term survival of trees from the proposal, and referred to the comments of the CYC Conservation Officer. She also stated that the proposal was contrary to Local Plan policies.

Representations were received from the applicants agent. He stated that the RMBI was a national charity, and that the proposal would supplement the facilities available and promote independent living. The proposal was for 45 family houses, enhanced and new care facilites, play area and open spaces, and trees would be retained and new trees planted, Section 106 agreements would be attached to the application regarding open space and education provision and road junction improvement.

Cllr Aspden spoke as Ward Councillor. He stated that residents had concerns regarding the proposal and the local community do not feel that it would be a benefit. He stated that the proposal does not consider the conservation area, or the historic character of the area, and that the proposal would lead to an increase in traffic and a reduced quality of life for residents.

Cllr Scott spoke regarding issues related to affordable housing, density, St Oswalds Road access, safety, leisure, loss of community, and the conservation area.

Members discussed flooding, affordable housing, lettings policy, the proposed play area, protection of trees, parking and traffic and other highway issues, the bowling green, the conservation area, and loss of amenity to the area.

RESOLVED :            That the application be refused.

REASON:                 

1             The proposed relocated bowling green is not considered to be of a commensurate standard compared to the existing bowling green on the site. It is considered it would not be equivalent in terms of usefulness and quality in the absence of a footpath around the entire perimeter of the green and because of the proximity of tree(s) to the relocated bowling green would be likely to cause leaf fall and shading. This is considered contrary to advice in PPG17: Sport and Recreation.

 2            The proposal would pose a high risk to the protected Lime tree (T15/271), that has a high public amenity value, as a result of the development around it including the construction of the bowling green and associated parking spaces and an increased risk to other trees on site from development as a whole.  It is therefore contrary to Policy NE1 of the City of York Draft Local Plan (incorporating fourth set of changes, April 2005) and BS guidelines 5837.

 3            The combined effect of the introduction of the access road with consequential loss of boundary enclosure, the scale of built development closer to Main Street and the loss of the informality of the parkland area adjacent to Main Street by the introduction of formal playspace, bowling green and potential loss of the lime tree, would erode the open setting of this part of the Fulford Conservation Area.  This provides a visual break in the ribbon development along Main Street/Fulford Road, which helps to define the identity of Fulford village and separates it from the main urban area of York.  As a result, the proposal would harm the character and appearance of the Fulford Conservation Area.  It is therefore contrary to advice in Planning Policy Guidance Note 15: Planning and the Historic Environment, Policy E4 of the North Yorkshire County Structure Plan and Policy HE2 of the City of York Draft Local Plan (incorporating fourth set of changes, April 2005).

 4            The proposal would result in the loss of general amenity to the local community.  It would detract from the setting of an area of open parkland, which, although private, has public views of it and into it that contribute to the character and identity of the area and quality of the local environment.  The proposal would therefore not respect or enhance the local environment and as such is contrary to national advice in Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Principles and Policy GP1 of the City of York Draft Local Plan (incorporating fourth set of changes, April 2005).