Agenda item

This matter is reported to Planning Committee following the recent submission of an appeal against non-determination to the Secretary of State by the applicant.  Members are requested to consider this report and to endorse the approach that will be presented to the Planning Inspectorate as the Council’s case at the public inquiry. 

The application is for outline planning permission with all matters reserved except access, for circa 300 residential dwellings, associated landscaping, public open space, and the formation of two new vehicle accesses from New Lane.

This matter was reported to Planning Committee following the  submission of an appeal against non-determination to the Secretary of State by the applicant.  Members were requested to consider the report and to endorse the reasons for refusal that will be presented to the Planning Inspectorate as the Council’s case at the public inquiry, the hearing opening on 11th January 2022.

The application was for outline planning permission with all matters reserved except access, for circa 300 residential dwellings, associated landscaping, public open space, and the formation of two new vehicle accesses from New Lane.

The Head of Planning and Development Services gave an update noting that two letters in support of the application had been received. In answer to a question from a Member she noted that there had been an up to date sustainability appraisal. Members asked a number of questions to which officers responded that:

·        The site was considered to remain as a Green Belt site.

·        There were technical and highways issues within the application that had not been resolved.

·        The application decision date passed in July and the Applicant had appealed non determination.

Public Speakers

David Jobling (Vice Chair of Huntington Parish Council) spoke in objection to the application on behalf of the Parish Council. He explained the history and three core principles of the Huntington Neighbourhood Plan and selection of sites within it. The noted the legal standing of the plan and the rejection of the site within it.

Gwen Swinburn spoke in support of the application with its access to local amenities, and cycling and walking access to the city. She noted the need to provide homes for new arrivals to the city and with reference to S106 expressed concern that there were no 4 or 5 bedroom houses in light of the need for homes for larger families of refugees. In response to Member questions she noted Lib Dem support for the 970 homes and that concerning the golf club being open to everyone, that it was an elite sport.

Cllr Orrell (Ward Councillor) spoke on the application on behalf of the Ward Councillors for Huntington and New Earswick. He noted that the site was in the Green Belt, was not included in the Local Plan for development and was not supported by the Huntington Neighbourhood Plan for development. He noted there had been a number of developments in recent years and that Huntington was a densely built area.

Cllr Hollyer moved the officer recommendation to endorse the reasons to contest the appeal. This was seconded by Cllr Ayre. During debate a number of views were expressed, during which the Chair clarified that the Neighbourhood Plan was part of the development plan for the area. A vote was taken with 8 Members in favour, 5 against and 2 abstentions.

The motion carried and it was therefore:

Resolved:

     i.        That Committee endorse the reasons to contest the appeal that may be presented to the Planning Inspectorate as part of the Council’s Statement of Case at the forthcoming appeal.

    ii.        That delegated authority is given to the Chief Planner, having regard to the heads of terms set out in this report, addendums and/or Planning Committee minutes, to negotiate and complete a document containing obligations pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) in order to meet the requirement of the Planning Inspector.

Reasons:

     i.        The proposed development was located within the Green Belt.  It would constitute inappropriate development in the Green Belt as set out in Section 13 of the National Planning Policy Framework.  Inappropriate development is by definition harmful to the Green Belt. The proposal would result in a permanent detrimental impact on openness of the Green Belt due to its scale and location and would conflict with the Green Belt's purposes, as identified in NPPF paragraphs 137 and 138.

    ii.        The site was not one which has been identified for development in the Publication Draft Local Plan 2018 (which is at examination stage).  The benefits put forward by the applicant did not, either individually or cumulatively, clearly outweigh the totality of the identified harm and therefore do not amount to very special circumstances necessary to justify the proposal for the purposes of the NPPF.

  iii.        The proposal was considered contrary to advice within the National Planning Policy Framework, in particular section 13 'Protecting Green Belt Land', and the following local policies: Huntington Neighbourhood Plan 2021, policy H14 ‘Green Belt’;  the Publication Draft Local Plan 2018 spatial strategy as detailed in policies SS1, and SS2 and Green Belt policy GB1, and the 2005 Draft Local Plan policies SP2, SP3 and GB1.

  iv.        The impact of the proposed development on the wider highway network, and highway safety was yet to be determined.  The required level of mitigation in this respect was yet to be determined and agreed.  As such the proposed development may not accord with NPPF policy regarding promoting sustainable transport, in particular paragraphs 110, 111 and 112.

[The meeting adjourned from 18:43 to 18:50]