Get involved: send your pictures, video, news and views by texting IGNEWS to 80360, or email
Development bid four housing on Otley green belt fails
A proposal to build large new houses near the edge of Otley’s Green Belt has been rejected for a second time.
The scheme, to create five big properties in a field behind 210 Bradford Road, was initially rejected by Leeds City Council last year.
Now a planning inspector has backed that verdict by refusing an appeal and judging the plan to be unsustainable, due to concerns over drainage and the impact on neighbours.
Councillor Colin Campbell (Lib Dem, Otley & Yeadon) was one of a number of people who had lodged a written objection to the proposal.
He said: “I welcome the inspector’s decision.
“This was always an inappropriate application which would have seen the loss of important green space on the Chevin.
“It also had a number of other environmental issues and I am pleased the inspector has agreed with local residents and rejected the application.”
Inspector Peter Willows, in his appeal outcome statement, said: “I conclude that the proposal does not include adequate provisions and information to show that the site would be properly drained, and that it has not been established that the development would not cause or exacerbate local flooding.”
As for the proposed acess to the new homes, via a private drive that would run between 210 and 212 Bradford Road, he believed that would be “unacceptably intrusive” to those living in number 210.
Mr Willows also flagged up concerns about night-time nuisance. He said: “I consider that the headlights from vehicles leaving the site would be likely to be a significant source of intrusion and annoyance, and might also disturb the sleep of people using the bedrooms at the rear of these properties.
“For these reasons I conclude that the development would cause significant harm to the living conditions of the occupiers of numbers 210 and 212.”
His findings backed those of Leeds City Council, which had refused the outline scheme on the grounds it would “result in an unacceptable adverse impact on visual and residential amenity and, in the absence of a detailed and agreed drainage scheme, could result in an unacceptable impact on drainage locally.”
Comments are closed on this article.