2 Cross Lane, North Frodingham, DRIFFIELD, East Riding of York, YO25 8JY

2 Cross Lane, North Frodingham, DRIFFIELD, East Riding of York, YO25 8JY — East Riding of Yorkshire Council — Appeal Decision Site visit made on 3 December 2024 by C Skelly BA (Hons) MSc MA MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 17 January 2025 Appeal Ref: APP/E2001/W/24/3350403 2 Cross Lane, North Frodingham, East Riding of Yorkshire YO25 8JY • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) (the Act) against a refusal to grant outline planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mrs Nellie Coutts deceased against the decision of East Riding of Yorkshire Council. • The application Ref is 24/00943/OUT. • The development proposed is three two-bedroom dwellings and one three-bedroom dwelling on previously developed land. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Preliminary Matters 2. The proposal is in outline with matters sought in relation to access and layout. The remaining matters would be required as part of a reserved matters application. Vehicular access is to be taken through the location of the existing workshop building. Although matters of design are reserved, the appellant has submitted Illustrative elevation drawings which show that the dwellings would be two storeys and of traditional appearance. 3.

2 Cross Lane, North Frodingham, DRIFFIELD, East Riding of York, YO25 8JY — East Riding of Yorkshire Council — Appeal Decision The National Planning Policy Framework was revised on 12 December 2024 (the Framework). I have sought comments from the parties on the changes and these have informed my decision. 4. Because the appeal site lies partly within the North Frodingham Conservation Area (CA), where appropriate, I have had regard to the statutory duty contained in Section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (LBCAA). Main Issues 5. The main issues are: • The effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area including the CA within which part of the site lies; and • Whether the site is a suitable location for housing having regard to the development strategy for the area. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

2 Cross Lane, North Frodingham, DRIFFIELD, East Riding of York, YO25 8JY — East Riding of Yorkshire Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/E2001/W/24/3350403 Reasons Character and appearance 6. The appeal site comprises a two-storey brick-built dwelling which fronts onto Cross Lane. To the rear there is a single storey extension, which runs along the northern boundary of the site and a garden and parking area which includes outbuildings. The dwelling is attached to a single storey, gable fronted brick-built workshop with tall timber doors, which has windows on its side elevation. The remaining front section of the site is bounded by a tall brick-built wall which is the same height as the eaves of the workshop. Both the existing dwelling and the workshop building are within the boundary of the CA. 7. The site is located towards the edge of the village and is in close walking distance to local facilities. The character and appearance of the village transitions from the close-knit pattern of development near the market cross, to the much more spacious, detached dwellings along the west side of Cross Lane. The prevailing character to this side of Cross Lane is linear in form, with limited depth to development and dwellings located within spacious plots.

2 Cross Lane, North Frodingham, DRIFFIELD, East Riding of York, YO25 8JY — East Riding of Yorkshire Council — Appeal Decision According to the proposed layout, two detached dwellings would be located towards the rear of the appeal site and a pair of semi-detached properties would address Cross Lane. 8. Although the appeal building has a long rear extension, the proposed detached dwellings would introduce development well beyond the existing built form. They would therefore appear physically divorced from the village. This separation would be accentuated by the gap between the pair of semi-detached dwellings on the road frontage and the parking areas in between the detached dwellings. The proposed layout therefore does not respond appropriately to the established pattern of development, which would lead to visual incursion into the countryside. Furthermore, the number of dwellings on the site would not reflect the spacious layout of dwellings along this part of Cross Lane, making it appear cramped in comparison. The proposal would therefore harm the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area. Conservation Area 9. The CA is a small area which includes the historic core of the village, the Grade II listed market cross and a dozen houses.

2 Cross Lane, North Frodingham, DRIFFIELD, East Riding of York, YO25 8JY — East Riding of Yorkshire Council — Appeal Decision The North Frodingham Conservation Area Appraisal (2011) describes the CA as focussed around the junction of its two medieval streets, Main Street and Cross Lane. The significance of the CA lies with its late eighteenth and nineteenth century buildings which exhibit the styles, forms and functions of those eras. The workshop building is seen against the background of the historic market cross when viewed along main street and is prominent in views entering the village. The building retains its traditional style and appearance and therefore makes a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the CA. 10. The proposal would require the demolition of the workshop building to be replaced with the new access. The loss of this traditional building would harm the character and appearance of the CA and this in turn would erode the historical setting of the listed market cross. This loss would be compounded by it being one of only a dozen properties located within the CA. Therefore, the proposed development would fail to preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the CA. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

2 Cross Lane, North Frodingham, DRIFFIELD, East Riding of York, YO25 8JY — East Riding of Yorkshire Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/E2001/W/24/3350403 11. The harm to the CA would be less than substantial for the purposes of the Framework. However, less than substantial harm does not equate to a less than substantial objection. Paragraph 212 of the Framework makes clear that, when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. This is irrespective of whether any potential harm amounts to substantial harm, total loss or less than substantial harm to its significance. 12. Paragraph 215 of the Framework advises that any harm to a designated heritage asset should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal including where appropriate, securing its optimum viable use. The proposal would provide 4 dwellings which would make a minor contribution towards meeting the Council’s housing supply. There would also be some minor, temporary economic benefits arising from their construction. The appellant has put forward that the realignment of the access to provide greater visibility is a benefit which counts in favour of the proposal.

2 Cross Lane, North Frodingham, DRIFFIELD, East Riding of York, YO25 8JY — East Riding of Yorkshire Council — Appeal Decision However, I note that at present the access only serves one property and that no accidents have been identified. Although concerns have been raised by third parties about highways safety these appear to be in relation to the proposed intensification of the site. Therefore, there would be neutral public benefits from the new access arrangement. 13. Taken overall, I attribute moderate weight to the public benefits of the proposal, which is insufficient to outweigh the less than substantial harm to the CA. Given this, I conclude that the proposal would fail to satisfy the requirements of the LBCAA, paragraph 210 of the Framework and conflicts with policies S4, ENV1 and ENV3 of the East Riding Local Plan Strategy Document 2016 (LP). Together these policies amongst other things seek to ensure that development does not detract from the character and appearance of villages and that the significance, views, setting, character, appearance and context of heritage assets is conserved. Suitable location 14. Policies S3 and S4 of the LP set out the overall approach for new development and a settlement hierarchy which aims to focus development in locations with a range of services and infrastructure.

2 Cross Lane, North Frodingham, DRIFFIELD, East Riding of York, YO25 8JY — East Riding of Yorkshire Council — Appeal Decision North Frodingham is defined in the settlement hierarchy as a village. Policy S4 is supportive of development which helps to maintain the vibrancy of villages where it is of an appropriate scale, encourages the re-use of previously developed land and does not involve the significant loss of best and most versatile agricultural land. Within the development limits of villages new housing is supported where it does not detract from the character and appearance of the village. The development limit runs through the appeal site and excludes the outbuildings to the west of the site. This means that the two proposed detached dwellings would be outside of the development limit, whereas the pair of semis within. 15. I have found that the demolition of the workshop building would fail to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the CA. Hence, despite that part of the proposal would be located within the development limit, the development would detract from the character of the village. The proposal would therefore conflict with part B of policy S4. 16. The two detached dwellings are considered as Countryside for the purposes of the development plan and subject to the requirements of part C of policy S4.

2 Cross Lane, North Frodingham, DRIFFIELD, East Riding of York, YO25 8JY — East Riding of Yorkshire Council — Appeal Decision This https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3

2 Cross Lane, North Frodingham, DRIFFIELD, East Riding of York, YO25 8JY — East Riding of Yorkshire Council — Appeal Decision This https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3

2 Cross Lane, North Frodingham, DRIFFIELD, East Riding of York, YO25 8JY — East Riding of Yorkshire Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/E2001/W/24/3350403 policy is supportive of new housing which includes replacement dwellings, new dwellings of exceptional quality or truly outstanding innovative design and affordable housing. No information has been submitted which suggests that the proposal would satisfy any of these requirements for housing in the countryside. As I have already outlined, the proposal would extend the built form beyond the development limit. Therefore, this part of the site is not considered to be a suitable location for housing having regard to the development strategy. 17. The appellant has put forward that the site is previously developed land (PDL). There is some dispute between the parties as to whether the whole of the site is PDL. Even if I accepted the appellants case, it would not overcome the harm that I have identified with regards to detracting from the character and appearance of the village. 18. I have been referred to applications which were permitted at Alderson Mews and 8b Cross Lane. I have not been provided with all the details which led to the permission on these sites. Whilst I can see that there are some broad similarities there are notable differences.

2 Cross Lane, North Frodingham, DRIFFIELD, East Riding of York, YO25 8JY — East Riding of Yorkshire Council — Appeal Decision In the case of Alderson Mews the site appears to have been bounded by development on two sides and well related to the village layout. Whilst 8b Cross Lane involved the conversion and extension of an existing building. Hence, the evidence does not convincingly show that they are directly comparable to the appeal case. Accordingly, they carry insufficient favourable weight to lead me to a different finding on the merits of the appeal proposal. 19. I conclude that the appeal site is not in a suitable location for housing having regard to the development strategy for the area. The proposal thereby conflicts with policies S3 and S4 of the LP, which seek amongst other things to support development which maintains the vibrancy of villages and the countryside where it does not detract from their character and appearance. Other Matters 20. The appellant contends that the site has been used recently as a care home, although this is disputed by the Council. Within the context of an appeal under section 78 of the Act it is not my remit to formally determine whether the development is lawful use. Other specific means of ascertaining this are available. Conclusion 21.

2 Cross Lane, North Frodingham, DRIFFIELD, East Riding of York, YO25 8JY — East Riding of Yorkshire Council — Appeal Decision I have found that the proposal conflicts with the development plan in relation to the location of housing and would harm the character and appearance of the area, including the CA. These harms are not outweighed by the benefits and therefore, material considerations, do not indicate that the appeal should be decided other than in accordance with the development plan. 22. Accordingly, for the reasons given above the appeal should be dismissed.

2 Cross Lane, North Frodingham, DRIFFIELD, East Riding of York, YO25 8JY — East Riding of Yorkshire Council — C Skelly INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4