Agenda item

Application: 2019/0759/FUL

Location: Land adjacent A163, Market Weighton Road, North Duffield

Proposal: Proposed erection of 5 dwellings and associated infrastructure

The Senior Planning Officer presented the application which had been brought before Planning Committee as an update to the report considered at the Planning Committee held on 27January 2021. Members debated the proposal; acknowledged that it was not a straightforward scheme and expressed concerns given it was a departure from the Council’s Development Plan and a site that had been given initial permission when the Council did not have a five-year land supply.

Members noted that the application was for the proposed erection of five dwellings and the associated infrastructure.

The Officer Update Note stated that 2015/0517/OUT had lapsed and that several separate applications had been submitted and subsequently approved, despite the Local Planning Authority now having a five-year (plus) land supply for housing. Condition 17 (the removal of permitted development rights in respect of conversion of garages) was to be omitted, and at page 61 of the report the informatives relating to consent and those following should state ‘Internal Drainage Board’s’ consent rather than ‘Board’s consent’.

The Committee asked questions of the Officer regarding the limited landscaping and how some Members felt that this would impact on the character of the site, as there were still no measures to address this on the revised scheme.

Members queried whether the Parish Council had been consulted again on the revised proposals before the meeting; Officers explained that as the changes had been so minimal, consultation was not required. The Parish Council’s previous objections had been focused on the housing types. Members acknowledged that the layout of the houses on the site had not been altered.

Vikki Sykes, agent, was invited remotely into the meeting and spoke in favour of the application.

Members debated the application further, with some Committee Members not accepting the arguments given in the report and by Officers for the lack of planting on the western edge of the site, which would, in some Members’ opinions, be detrimental. Other Members questioned whether tree planting was a serious enough issue to justify going against the Officer’s recommendation.

Other Members expressed a strong opposition to the scheme and gave a few reasons for refusal. These reasons included:

·      that there were no extant planning permissions on the site, as all previous permissions for outline and reserved maters had lapsed;

·      that the proposed housing development on the site was a departure from the Development Plan which was the statutory starting point for decision making;

·      that there were no material planning considerations which outweighed the conflicts with the up-to-date Development Plan;

·      that the proposed development was outside the statutory development limits of North Duffield and in the open countryside, in breach of planning policy; and

·      that given the proposals were a departure from the Development Plan, by definition they were not sustainable; as such in this regard there were no significant social, economic and environmental benefits to the village of North Duffield.

It was proposed and seconded that the application be REFUSED. An amendment was subsequently proposed that the application be APPROVED, subject to an amendment to Condition 15 that further details on tree planting would be confirmed in due course.

A vote was taken on the amendment to APPROVE the application and was LOST.

A vote was taken on the substantive motion to REFUSE the application and was CARRIED.

RESOLVED:

1.    To REFUSE the application for the following reasons:

·           there were no extant planning permissions on the site, as all previous permissions for outline and reserved maters had lapsed;

·           the proposed housing development on the site was a departure from the Development Plan which was the statutory starting point for decision making;

·           there were no material planning considerations which outweighed the conflicts with the up-to-date Development Plan;

·           the proposed development was outside the statutory development limits of North Duffield and in the open countryside, in breach of planning policy;

·           that given the proposals were a departure from the Development Plan, by definition they were not sustainable; as such in this regard there were no significant social, economic and environmental benefits to the village of North Duffield; and

2.    To delegate to Officers the agreement of the precise wording, in consultation with Councillor J Mackman and Councillor R Packham.