Agenda with Maps and Applications (21Mb) - pdf - Selby District ...

2.7.9 Consequently, subject to the attachment of a condition requiring samples of
materials and full landscaping details to be submitted and approved in writing prior
to the commencement of development, it is considered that the proposed
development would not have an adverse impact upon the visual amenities or the
character of the area. In this context the proposed development is considered to be
acceptable and in accordance with polices ENV (1) (4), H6(1) and the advice
contained within the NPPF.
2.8 Impact on Residential Amenity
2.8.1 One of the Core planning principles set out in Paragraph 12 of the NPPF states that
planning should always seek a good standard of amenity for all existing and future
occupants of land and buildings
2.8.2 Point 1 of Policy ENV1 in the Local Plan states that the District Council will have
regard to the impact a development would have upon the amenity of adjoining
occupiers. Point 6 of Policy H6 in the Selby District Local Plan states that residential
development within the defined development limits of market towns and villages
should not have a significant adverse impact upon amenity. Significant weight
should be attached to point 1 of policy ENV1 and point 6 of policy H6 as they are
broadly consistent with the aims of the NPPF to protect residential amenity.
2.8.3 The proposed dwellings would be located a minimum of 4m from the site’s
boundaries that are shared with residential properties, with the dwellings being set
at least 9m from any neighbouring residential property.
2.8.4 The proposed dwellings are laid out in such a way that they would not introduce
habitable room windows directly facing those in neighbouring properties, with at
least 8m separation being provided between the habitable room windows in the
proposed dwellings and the site’s boundaries.
2.8.5 Having regard to these facets of the development and the existing buildings on site
it is not considered that the introduction of the proposed dwellings would have a
significant adverse impact upon the level of residential amenity neighbouring
residents can reasonably expect to enjoy – they would not be overbearing and their
introduction would not result in neighbouring occupiers experiencing a significant
reduction in the level of light they receive or the privacy they enjoy.
2.8.6 With regards to the proposed garages the dwelling at plot number 4 would have a
double, detached garage adjacent to the common boundary with 1 Manor Court and
the dwelling at plot 1 would have a detached garage located adjacent to the
common boundary with the dwelling at 5 Manor Court.
2.8.9 The garage at plot 4 is considered to be acceptable as there are a series of existing
buildings running along the common boundary and there is an existing high
boundary wall that would be repaired and retained. The garage at plot 1 is also
considered to be acceptable as it would be located adjacent to the blank gable wall
of 5 Manor Court.
2.8.10 In terms of activity and the levels of noise and disturbance neighbouring residents
would experience, having regard to the established use of the site for storage and
259