HOUSEHOLDERS fear plans to build homes outside the village limits of their community could open the floodgates to further development.

Hambleton District council planners overruled objections to approve a scheme for five new homes on the outskirts of Burneston, near Bedale. Officers said although the plan did not fit in with existing national policies where approval should only be given for developments outside village limits in “exceptional circumstances”, more recent policies promoted sustainable development in rural areas to maintain the vitality of rural communities.

At a public meeting householders raised concerns that planning approval for the five houses off Manor Walk would open the Eastern boundaries of the village to new development for between 40 to 50 extra houses swamping the existing community which currently has 130 houses and a population of 300.

Objections were made by 25 people.

One resident warned: "There are at least two brownfield sites in the village that should be developed before we build upon greenfield sites.

"If these five houses are approved then it will redraw the eastern boundary of the delimitation of the village and so allow continued development along the rear of St Lambert's Drive and Pennine View toward Back Lane.”

The Parish council also objected saying: "The drainage systems of the village are barely able to cope with the demands placed upon them, particularly as regards the removal of rainwater. Further development would compromise these drains even more.

“In particular, if this proposed scheme were to be just the first phase in a much larger development in the coming years, the capacity of the foul-water drainage system would be completely overwhelmed and would require major infrastructure renewal . Another concern relating to infrastructure is that the broadband service in Burneston is already unsatisfactory.”

Peter Walker who lives in the village said the development approved now did include two affordable homes which was an improvement on the original plans for five large homes.

He added:”The fact that we objected in such large numbers has made the developers take a step back and rethink. There is still concern this could open the way for future development. The outcome is disappointing, but the councillors took into account the objections that were made.”

The applicants, Charles Craggs and Arthur Barker, a North Yorkshire County Councillor, said the application should be considered on its own merits and not on speculation.

Officers said consideration of future development was not relevant to the application because each proposal was made on its own merits.