Agenda item

Erection of 4 no. detached dwellings [Heworth Without Ward] [Site Visit].

Consideration was given to a full application, submitted by Lovel Cooper (South Yorkshire) Ltd, for the erection of 4 no. detached dwellings.

Officers updated that there had now been 10 letters of objection received from the occupiers of residential properties in the area. He stated that amendments were required to Condition 13 to ensure that the drainage details were submitted to and agreed by the Local Planning Authority.

In answer to Members questions Officers explained that the multi-shunting reference in the Highway Network Management’s comments meant that vehicles would be unable to access plot 4 in one manoeuvre.

Representations in objection to the application were received from a resident of Meadow Way who spoke on behalf of residents to the east of the site. He confirmed that they had no objections in principle to the development of the site. He stated that residents felt that this proposal was an over development of the site, and that the properties would be overbearing and out of character with the area. Reference was made to the 1.4 m high difference in the ridge height of the new properties together with the development being brought forward of the building line. He also raised objections in relation to the balcony screens, there being insufficient parking, removal of trees and possible damage to boundary walls. He requested members to refuse the application, as it would have an adverse affect on the amenity of the area.

Representations in objection were also received on behalf of a resident of Stray Garth who also favoured development of the site but he requested refusal of this application on the grounds of massing, height and density. He referred to the large blank wall proposed adjacent to his property and suggested a reduction to 3 properties of two rather than 3 storeys.

Representations in support were received from the applicant’s agent who confirmed that, since the scheme had been submitted, they had undertaken a number of amendments to take into account neighbours concerns. He stated that the scale and density of the development met Government guidance and that these were family homes rather than flats.

Members expressed concern at the need to install obscure glazing in the only windows to the top floor bedrooms these windows also being “fixed shut”. They questioned whether this could be classed as “reasonable living conditions”. Members also questioned how the Community Home had been marketed; removal of trees on the site and whether vehicular access by multi-shunting meant there was insufficient space on site for four properties.

With reference to concerns raised at the loss of a community facility, Officers confirmed that evidence had been provided by the Primary Care Trust stating that the increase in community-based support had reduced the need for residential care for people with mental illness. Where appropriate patients had been transferred to accommodation at Acomb Garth.

The Chair expressed concerns, following the site visit, regarding the use of obscure glazing which he felt would result in future occupiers having inadequate amenities or without this overlooking neighbouring properties. He stated that the dwellings would be 1.4m taller than the surrounding properties and be in front of the building line by around 2m.

Councillor Cregan stated that the proposal was an efficient use of land within government guidelines and he requested that a note be taken of his voting against the refusal of the application.

RESOLVED:             That the application be refused. ^1.

REASON:      1 The Council consider that by virtue of the height of the proposed dwellings and their close proximity to adjoining homes and gardens the development would appear unduly dominant and overbearing and this would detract from neighbours' living conditions resulting in an unacceptable loss of their amenity. As such the proposal conflicts with policy GP1 (in particular criterion b and i) of the City of York Draft Local Plan  (fourth set of changes) approved April 2005 and advice relating to design quality and context contained within PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Developments) and PPS3 (Housing).

                      2 The density, height and layout of the proposed development together with the loss of existing boundary trees and the cramped environment for vehicle movements results in an unacceptable overdevelopment of the site.  The development is not considered to acceptably relate to that of surrounding housing and would have a negative impact on the character and appearance of the surrounding environment and therefore conflicts with Policies GP1 (criterion a), H4a (criterion c and d) and H5a of the City of York Draft Local Plan (fourth set of changes) 2005 and advice relating to design quality and context contained within PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Developments) and PPS3 (Housing).

                      3 By virtue of the fact that in order to prevent unacceptable levels of overlooking into neighbouring properties the Council consider that the second floor bedroom windows in the front elevation of plots 2,3 and 4 would need to be obscure glazed and fixed shut and as these windows represent the only principal outlook from these rooms, this would create an unsatisfactory living environment for occupiers of these rooms resulting in an unacceptable standard of residential accommodation and amenity.  As such this would not comply with advice relating to design quality contained within PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Developments) and PPS3 (Housing).