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

Land Comprising Field West of Askham Bryan College, York Road to Westfield Cottages, Askham Bryan, York [20/01923/FULM]

Erection of 2 no. cattle buildings, 1 no. hay/straw storage building, 1 no. enclosure,  2 no. tanks,  and hardstanding for use as a beef rearing unit [Rural West York Ward]

 

Minutes:

Members considered a major full application from Askham Bryan College for the erection of two cattle buildings, one hay/straw storage building, one enclosure, two tanks, and hardstanding for use as a beef rearing unit at land comprising field west of Askham Bryan College, York Road to Westfield Cottages, Askham Bryan, York. The Head of Development Services gave a presentation on the application.

 

Public Speakers

Kathryn Jukes, Agent for the Applicant, spoke in support of the application. She explained that Askham Bryan College was one of the main land based colleges in the country and the emerging Local Plan recognised the college. The college had expanded over a number of years and the proposed shed would extend existing facilities for which it had been awarded funding from the government for the development of the facility. She ended by noting a number of difficulties in contacting the drainage officer and the Head of Development Services noted that this was being resolved.

 

Members asked Kathryn Jukes a number of questions to which she responded that:

·        The application related to teaching and learning on rearing beef cattle. Rearing the beef locally would reduce carbon emissions.

·        The travel plan did not form part of this application. Officers advised that that it would not be reasonable to add a travel plan condition.

·        The cattle would not be kept inside all year long and the site was within a field where cattle would be allowed outside. This was not an intensive farming facility.

·        Cattle rearing was part of the wider curriculum at the college.

 

Members then asked a further questions from officers to which they responded that:

·        The condition for the discharge of run off rates was included in condition 3.

·        Public rights of way were not enforced by planning conditions.

·        Regarding a proposed additional condition relating to restricting the use of the building, any change of use would require a new planning application.

·        Condition 8 was a standard ecology condition and condition 7 related to landscape mitigation.

·        It was reasonable that there was a travel plan for different parts of the college.

·        The right of the way referred to in the report was a different right of way to that closed by the college previously.

 

Cllr Ayre proposed an amended condition that if the building was removed from education/agricultural use for 18 months it would be demolished. This was seconded by Cllr D’Agorne. A vote was taken with 8 for and 4 against. The motion carried. 

 

Cllr Ayre proposed approval with the above amended condition seconded by Cllr Doughty. A vote was taken with 13 for and one against.

 

The motion was carried and it was

 

Resolved: That delegated authority to be given to the Head of Development Services to:

i. refer the application to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government under the requirements of Section 77 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, and should the application not be called in by the Secretary of State, then APPROVE the application subject to

ii. The conditions set out in the report with the Head of Development Services granted delegated powers to determine the final detail of the planning conditions

 

                   iii an amended condition that if the building was removed from education/agricultural use for 18 months it would be demolished.

 

                   iv. Condition 7 being amended to in perpetuity.

 

Reason:    

                     i.        The application site is located within the general extent of the York Green Belt and serves two Green Belt purposes. As such it falls to be considered under paragraph 143 of the NPPF which states inappropriate development, is by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances. Very special circumstances will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, are clearly outweighed by other considerations. National planning policy dictates that substantial weight should be given to any harm to the Green Belt.

In addition to the harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, it is considered that the proposal would have a harmful effect on the openness of the Green belt when one of the most importance attributes of Green Belts are their openness and the proposal would undermine at least two of the five Green Belt purposes. Substantial weight is attached to the harm that the proposal would cause to the Green Belt. The harm to the Green Belt is added to by the harm to the visual character and amenity identified in the report

It is considered that the economic and educational benefits, together with the location constraints identified in paragraphs 5.37 and 5.38 are considered to be cumulatively’ very special circumstances’ that clearly outweigh the definitional harm to the green belt, the harm to the openness and permanence of the green belt and the harm to the visual character and amenity arising from the proposed development. 

 

                    ii.        Approval is recommended subject to the referral of the application to the Secretary of State under The Town and Country Planning (Consultation) (England) Direction 2009 (application received before 21 April 2021) and the application not being called in by the Secretary of State for determination. The application is required to be referred to the Secretary of State as the development is considered to be inappropriate development in the Green Belt, and the proposed 3 no. buildings would create floor space (1116.22sq.m) which is in excess of the of the 1000 sq.m floor space threshold set out in the Direction.

 

[The meeting adjourned from 17:18 to 17:30. Cllr Widdowson left the meeting at 17:18]

 

Supporting documents:

 

Feedback
Back to the top of the page