DCSIMG

Killinghall plan rejected at referral stage

The Killinghall Village sign. 1204074aa.

The Killinghall Village sign. 1204074aa.

 

Plans to develop a Killinghall field will not be going ahead, as a planning referral committee votes against the planning officers’ recommendation.

The application went before the committee following the council’s original rejection of the application in February.

In the first meeting since public hearings into the Development Plan Document (DPD) were put on hold following concerns raised by the examining inspector, councillors chose not to defer the application to the chief planner.

Killinghall Coun Michael Harrison (Con) said: “The concern remains that while putting homes on the site might not impact on the local development plan, the cumulative impact on the village could be quite significant. Another thing is the impact of traffic on the area.”

Concerns were raised about other developments, as plans for 75 houses on Picking Croft Lane were accepted in February. The imposition of traffic lights on the junction near the site, for which the highways department requested developer funding, also worried residents.

Knaresborough Scriven Park Coun Ivor Fox (Con) said: “This site has been hovering for 13 years and when we had a DPD this site was rejected by the independent inspector for one reason and that was the associated traffic problems.

“I am opposed to this for the traffic problems which will be created and the potential impact of ill health to the residents of Killinghall.”

Other councillors, however, focused on the need for housing in the Harrogate district and said Killinghall must take its fair share.

John Goodwin, partner at the applicant’s agent Carter Jonas said: “I think it is outrageous and irresponsible for the council to make such a decision. When you make these decisions they have to pass the test of reasonableness and when the council is not reasonable it exposes itself to appeal.”

The committee was advised to go into exempt session but voted against it.

 

Comments

 
 

Back to the top of the page