Agenda item

Members will consider an outline application by Jim Pigott, for the demolition of existing structures and erection of 6no. dwellings with associated access, car parking and landscaping (with all matters reserved except for access, layout and scale) [Strensall Ward]

Members considered an outline application at Pigotts Autoparts, Strensall, York, YO32 5XH for the demolition of existing structures and erection of 6no. dwellings with associated access, car parking and landscaping.

The Head of Planning and Development Services gave a presentation on the plans and the Development Management officer outlined the additional written information provided at the meeting.  This included an amendment to Reason for Refusal 3 as follows:

No information has been submitted to demonstrate that the proposal would comply with the requirements of Policy EC2 (Loss of Employment Land) of the draft Local Plan (2018). On the basis of the lack of information, Officers are unable to assess whether the proposed development complies with these policies and Paragraph 81 of the NPPF.

Public Speaker

Jim Pigott, the applicant and Tim Ross, the agent for the applicant, spoke in support of the application.  They provided some context for the plans and requested a deferral in order to undertake an ecological survey.  They highlighted the site’s proximity to shops, which they stated was a 15 minute walk, and the potential for multi-modal transport options.

In response to questions from Members, the agent for the applicant confirmed their willingness to undertake an ecological survey should the item be deferred.

Further to questions from Members, officers reported that, in accordance with paragraph 149 (g) of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the redevelopment of the previously developed land would not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt that the existing development.  It was therefore considered to be appropriate development within the Green Belt.

Following debate, the Chair proposed the officer recommendation to refuse the application for the reasons contained within report and in line with the update referred to above, subject to the amendment of the wording from ‘these policies’ to ‘the policy’.  This was seconded by Cllr Hollyer.  A vote was taken and Members voted, 7 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention, it was therefore:

Resolved:             That the application be refused.

Reason:                The presumption in favour of sustainable development set out at paragraph 11 of the NPPF does not apply when the application of policies relating to Green Belt and habitats sites (180) indicate that permission should be refused.

The application site is located within the general extent of the York Green Belt and serves a number Green Belt purposes. The proposal is not considered to further impact on the openness of the Green Belt and proposed development is considered to fall within exceptions149 (g) of the NPPF.

Insufficient information has been submitted with the application for the LPA, as the Competent Authority, to undertake a Habitats Regulations screening Assessment and Appropriate Assessment. On the basis of the lack of information, Officers are unable to assess whether there are any adverse effects on the integrity of the SAC, either alone or in combination with other plans or projects, or if any necessary mitigation measures may be required.

The proposed development is in an unsustainable location. It will require dependency on motorised vehicles due to the lack of sustainable transport options available. The nearest bus stop and local facilities are located 1200 metres away in Strensall village. Residents of the proposed dwellings would be entirely reliant on private cars. The proposed development fails to comply with paras 92 104, 105, 112, 124 and 130 of the NPPF.

No information has been submitted with respect of policies EC2 (Loss of Employment Land)), as such without further information  officers are unable to assess whether the loss of employment land is acceptable and therefore determine if  the proposed development complies with Draft Local Plan Policy EC2 and paragraph 81 of the NPPF

It is noted that the proposal would provide additional housing, however this is not considered to outweigh the above specified harms.

[5.50 pm, Cllr Hollyer left the meeting.]