Controversial plans for two new housing estates on the edge of a North Yorkshire village have been approved.
But planners have rejected a third scheme for Thorpe Willoughby, near Selby, amid concerns about the impact on ancient woodland.
Members of North Yorkshire Council’s Selby and Ainsty area planning committee backed developers’ plans for up to 140 houses on fields to the north of Leeds Road at a meeting last week.
The outline planning application was approved despite concerns from the local parish council and local residents, with more 80 objections being submitted to the council.
The concerns included the size of the development being too big for the village and the site not being allocated in the draft local plan, which has now been dropped, or the development plan for the village.
At the same meeting, plans were approved for up to 145 houses on land to the south of Leeds Road.
A number of objections were also submitted for this outline application, with the parish council warning that it would lead to “dangerously high” levels of traffic in the village.
But at the same meeting, councillors rejected plans for up to 110 houses on fields off the village’s Field Lane, despite the scheme, like the previous two discussed earlier in the meeting, being recommended for approval by planning officers.
Although concerns were raised about the impact of the other applications on Brayton Barf, a nearby covered reservoir which is surrounded by ancient woodland, councillors said the Field Lane scheme was closer than the other developments.
Cllr Arnold Warneken said: “I believe this application has the greater impact out of all three on Brayton Barf so therefore I am going to propose that we refuse this on the negative impact that this development would have.”
Cllr Karl Arthur added: “It’s right next to (Brayton Barf) — it’s only 500 yards away from it so it is going to have a really adverse impact.”
Cllr Bob Packham said the existing village boundary was “one of the cleanest and clearest you could have”.
He said: “This application is significantly different from the other two we’ve dealt with.
“My view is that this is unacceptable in terms of its impact on landscape. I think it is also unacceptable in terms of its impact on the structure of the settlement in that it’s completely the wrong side of Field Lane — that area should remain undeveloped.”
Members of the committee told the meeting they were worried about the cumulative impact of three developments on the area.
Committee chair, Cllr John Cattanach, said: “I could see no reason why the other two applications should be refused and they seem to fall within more natural boundaries.
“I have actually written down ‘cumulative’ because I think that is in this case significant, seeing we’ve just approved the other two.”
Councillors voted unanimously to reject the application.