Agenda item

Following his earlier declaration, Councillor R Packham left the meeting at this point and did not participate in the discussion or vote on the next item.

Application: 2020/1013/FULM

Location: Scarthingwell Golf Club, Scarthingwell Park, Barkston Ash, Tadcaster

Proposal: Erection of 99 holiday lodges with reception building, reconfiguration of the golf course and use of building as a golf academy and greenkeeper's store

The Principal Planning Officer presented the application which had been brought before Planning Committee as the site was within the Green Belt and the applicants were seeking consent for inappropriate development based on a justification utilising a case of Very Special Circumstances as enabling development.   In addition, the application had received in excess of 10 comments in support and more than 10 objections. The application had been advertised as a departure from the Development Plan, for wider publicity and under the Listed Building Act. The last of these notices expired on the 12 June 2021.

Officers explained that should Committee be minded to approve the application, it would need to be referred to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Consultation) (England Direction April 2021), as it was development in the Green Belt of buildings of more than in excess of 1,000sqm.

Members noted that the application was for the erection of 99 holiday lodges with reception building, reconfiguration of the golf course and use of building as a golf academy and greenkeeper's store.

The Officer Update Note advised Members that no further letters of support or objection had been received over those summarised within the Officers report.

Members queried if the holiday lodges would be permanent structures, whether research had been conducted to ascertain if similar developments had been approved in other areas, within the Green Belt; and if there was a boundary detail adjacent to the golf course to provide protection for the lodges from stray golf balls.  Officers confirmed that the holiday lodges would be permanent structures with the Council having a final say on the design, research conducted had not sourced any holiday lodge applications which were considered to be the same as this application; and there was a boundary detail adjacent to the golf course, however this only consisted of a low fence.  

Councillor Richard Musgrave, Ward Councillor, had submitted a statement to be read out to the Planning Committee against the application.

John Wyatt, agent, was invited remotely into the meeting and spoke in favour of the application.

Members debated the application and raised a number of concerns regarding the application, including its location in the Green Belt, it’s impact on the area and that it was inappropriate development within the Green Belt.

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

·       that the proposed erection of 99 holiday lodges with associated reception building and electricity sub-station was inappropriate development in the Green Belt.  Inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and in accordance with the NPPF, paragraph 144, it should be accorded substantial weight in the planning balance against the case for very special circumstances.

·       that the reconfiguration of the golf course to accommodate the holiday lodge complex, sub-station, car parking, and general access roadways would cause significant harm to the openness of the Green Belt.

·       that it was considered that the proposed holiday lodge complex represented a significant encroachment into the Green Belt.

·        that it was considered that the proposed holiday lodge complex would have a detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the Green Belt.  Taking into account the sites sensitive location in the Green Belt with listed buildings to the west, historic park and gardens to the south and west, and the nearby battlefield of Towton.

·       that it was considered that there would be some harm to the residential amenity in terms of increased footfall, increased vehicle movements, and the proposed residency all year round.  Due to the scale of the proposal there would also be negative impacts on the ecology, protected species and the Carr Wood ancient woodland.          

It was proposed and seconded that the application be REFUSED based on the reasons outlined above by Members and delegation was given to Officers to agree the precise wording for the reasons for refusal.  Upon being put to the vote, this was carried.

RESOLVED:

To REFUSE the application for the following reasons:

i)                The proposed development of the site namely the reconfiguration of the golf course in order to provide 99 New Holiday Lodges with reception building, car parking, substation, general access roadways and hard standing constitutes inappropriate development in the Green Belt as it falls outside the listed exceptions in paragraphs 149 and 150 of the National Planning Policy Framework. Furthermore, significant harm has been identified to the open character, appearance and setting of the Green Belt from the encroachment of the aforementioned development onto otherwise undeveloped land that has an absence of any built form or hard surfacing on it. The proposal would not protect the essential characteristics of the Green Belt, being its openness and permanence and would conflict with the purposes of including land within it. The increased footfall, increased vehicle movements and the proposed year-round residency would result in further harm to the openness and tranquil setting of the Green Belt and further harm to residential amenity, ecology, protected species and the Carr Wood Ancient Woodland.

In accordance with paragraphs 147 and 148 of the NPPF, the harm by definition of inappropriate development, and any other harm is attributed substantial weight in the planning balance. By comparison no other considerations amounting to Very Special Circumstances exist that would clearly outweigh the harm by reason of inappropriateness or the harm to the openness and other purposes of the Green Belt. As such, the proposed development would be contrary to national Green Belt policy contained in chapter 13 of the NPPF (July 2021) and Policies SP3(B) and SP18 of the Selby District Core Strategy Local Plan (2013) and Policy ENV1 of the Selby District Local Plan (2005).

ii)              The proposed scheme would have a detrimental impact on the setting of the Grade 2 Listed Buildings at Old Hall Farm to the west, Scarthingwell Hall Historic Park and Garden to the south, the Locally Important Landscape Area to the west and the nearby Towton Registered Battlefield. This would result in less than substantial harm to the significance of the designated and non-designated heritage assets and no public benefits have been identified that would outweigh this harm. On this basis the scheme is considered to be unacceptable as a result is contrary to Policies ENV1, ENV15 and ENV17 of the Selby District Local Plan (2005), Policies SP18 and SP19 Selby District Core Strategy Local Plan (2013) and paragraph 202 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2021).

Councillor Packham re-joined the meeting at this point.