‘Unacceptable’ plan for Filey luxury housing refused by council for second time

The plans would see construction of nine apartments, including a penthouse flat, at 24 Brooklands in the town’s centre.

It proposed four luxury apartments at both ground and first floor levels, and one three-bedroom “penthouse” on the second floor.

The planning authority said it was concerned about the proposed development’s scale, design, lack of affordable housing provision and parking spaces, and the impact on neighbouring properties and Listed buildings.

It also raised concerns about the proposed demolition of what is “assumed to be a WWII Gas Decontamination Centre” and the scheme’s overall “lack of resemblance” to the area.

Filey Town Council, the Highway Authority, and the council’s building conservation officer objected to the plans submitted by Tribeka Brooklands Ltd.

Several members of the public also objected to the plans over the development’s impact on wildlife and its impact on infrastructure services.

One resident said: “The housing should be provided for local people, not holidaymakers.”

The town council and Highway Authority also raised concerns about an “inadequate” parking provision which would provide “only 13 spaces for nine apartments” and would result in visitors parking on the road.

Last December the council refused a similar scheme by the same developer which said it had made appropriate changes.

However, according to a design and access statement, the scale and footprint of the design had not changed.

A planning report states that the scheme would have “an unacceptable impact” as a result of overbearing, overlooking, loss of privacy and overshadowing existing neighbouring properties.

Another major concern for the authority was the lack of affordable housing provision as the number of flats had been amended from 10 to nine, thus removing the requirement for an affordable housing contribution.

Officers questioned whether this had been “deliberately done to avoid such financial contribution”.

A council report concludes that the “previous reasons for refusal are clear and this application does not address [them].

“Due to the harm which has been clearly identified within [the plan], approval has not been possible in this case.”

The plan was refused by the North Yorkshire Council on Friday, March 8.