Agenda and minutes

At this point in the meeting, Members are asked to declare:

·        any personal interests not included on the Register of Interests

·        any prejudicial interests or

·        any disclosable pecuniary interests

which they may have in respect of business on this agenda.

At this point in the meeting, Members were asked to declare any personal prejudicial or pecuniary interests they may have in the business on the agenda.

Councillor Looker declared a personal and prejudicial interest in agenda item 4b, Fulford School as Cabinet Member for Education, Children and Young People.

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 22^nd January 2015.

Resolved:           That the minutes of the last meeting held on 22^nd January be approved and signed by the Chair as a correct record.

It is at this point in the meeting that members of the public who have registered their wish to speak can do so. The deadline for registering is by 5pm on Wednesday 18^th February 2015. Members of the public can speak on specific planning applications or on other agenda items or matters within the remit of the committee.

To register please contact the Democracy Officer for the meeting, on the details at the foot of this agenda.

Filming or Recording Meetings

“Please note this meeting will be filmed and webcast and that includes any registered public speakers, who have given their permission.  This broadcast can be viewed at http://www.york.gov.uk/webcasts.

Residents are welcome to photograph, film or record Councillors and Officers at all meetings open to the press and public. This includes the use of social media reporting, i.e. tweeting.  Anyone wishing to film, record or take photos at any public meeting should contact the Democracy Officer (whose contact details are at the foot of this agenda) in advance of the meeting.

The Council’s protocol on Webcasting, Filming & Recording of Meetings ensures that these practices are carried out in a manner both respectful to the conduct of the meeting and all those present.  It can be viewed at http://www.york.gov.uk/downloads/download/3130/protocol_for_webcasting_filming_and_recording_of_council_meetings

It was reported that there had been no registrations to speak under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme.

Members then considered five reports of the Assistant Director (Development Services, Planning and Regeneration) relating to the following planning applications, which outlined the proposals and relevant planning considerations and set out the views of the consultees and officers.

A major full application for the erection of a wind turbine (maximum height to blade tip 78 metres) with associated access tracks, crane pad, sub-station building, underground cabling and temporary construction compound. [Derwent Ward].

Consideration was given to a major full application for the erection of a wind turbine (maximum height to blade tip 78 metres) with associated access tracks, crane pad, sub station building, underground cabling and temporary construction compound.

Officers gave a brief update to advise that since the Committee Report was prepared and published a further letter of representation has been received objecting to the proposal on the grounds of impact on the open character of the Green Belt and the habitat of rare birds of prey.

Lynn Wilmore had registered to speak as a Local Resident. She raised concerns about the potential for low frequency noise and the impact this could have on residents. She felt that the noise assessment had not gone far enough and the appropriate limit would be breached at the nearest noise sensitive property.

Fergus Wilmore had registered to speak as a Local Resident. He advised that turbines were not suitable for flat land and raised concerns about the potential for strobing effects from the reflection as the blades rotate.

Mrs Ward had registered to speak as a Local Resident. She advised that the turbine would have far reaching consequences for Kexby and Dunnington and queried why this site had been chosen when it wasn’t viable in terms of wind speed. She felt that none of the residents concerns had been fully addressed by the applicant.

John Ray spoke as a Local Resident and as the County Mammal Recorder. he raised concerns about the impact of the turbine on wildlife in the area, in particular on Owls and Bats. The applicants bat survey had focused on numbers of bats in the area rather than the impact on individual bats and the fact there is evidence from other areas of the UK that turbines are harmful to bats.

Marianne McCallum spoke as the applicants agent. She advised that the Government applies significant weight to renewable energy resources and York as an area is underperforming in terms of renewable energy and the turbine offers an opportunity for York to play a part. In her opinion the proposed location of the Green Belt would not impact on the rural setting and there had been no issues identified relating to residential amenity, traffic, ecology, heritage or aviation.

Julian Sturdy MP spoke to advise that the National Planning Policy Framework advises against wind turbines being located within Green Belts. In relation to very special circumstances and the financial viability of the farm, no information had been supplied by the applicant relating to this, nor any information to suggest other options had been considered such as solar energy sources which may be less prominent.

Councillor Brooks had registered to speak as Ward Member. She advised that the turbine would be a blight to one of York’s important green corridors. She referred to a nearby nature reserve and rare birds such as buzzards that may be harmed.  She pointed out that the nearest property to the turbine would be 700m away and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 51a

A general regulation application for the erection of a two storey classroom block and a single storey sports block including sports hall and changing rooms. [Fulford Ward] [Site Visit].

Consideration was given to a general regulations application for the erection of a two storey classroom block and single storey sports hall and changing rooms.

Councillor Merrett joined the meeting at this point as Substitute for Councillor Looker.

Officers gave an update to the committee report, full details of which are attached to the online agenda for this meeting, the main points were as follows:

·        An additional condition requiring a formal pre-design BREEAM assessment for the design and procurement stages of the development.

·        Details of the Community Use Policy for the proposed Sports Hall.

·        Two further letters of support had been received and one in objection.

·        Further representations had been received from Fulford Parish Council expressing concern in respect of the proposed access from the Germany Beck development and the need to ensure it is constructed in a timely fashion.

Mr Gamston spoke as a Local Resident. He advised that he lived near to the entrance of Fulford School and the school has doubled in size in comparison to when it was first built but no other access arrangements have been made. He asked that officers look into the possibility of reserving the necessary land to implement an access road from the Germany Beck site to the school.

John Haewood spoke on behalf of himself and other residents. He raised concerns about residents not being consulted on the plans in good time. He advised that although residents support the school, he asked that obscure glazing be installed in the higher floors of the teaching block as this would be appreciated by residents.

Mark Ellis, Principal Education Officer spoke on behalf of the Council. He advised that the Council has a responsibility to ensure there are enough school places and the expansion of the school was necessary in order for pupils within the catchment to get a place.

Lorna Savage spoke as Head teacher at the school. She advised that additional capacity was required as currently not all pupils can be accommodated at the site for PE lessons and as a result teaching time is being lost as pupils travel between the University and the school to access facilities. She advised that there are 7 points throughout the school week where the school is operating  at maximum capacity.

David Ashton spoke as Chair of the School Governors. He advised that the school had contacted residents about the plans as soon as it was clear that funding for the improvements had been agreed. Discussions had taken place with the Ward Councillor and the Parish Council and access from the Germany Beck site is being offered.

Mary Urmston spoke on behalf of Fulford Parish Council. She advised that the Parish Council was sympathetic to the schools desire to expand but considered that the proposed sports hall building is very large and nothing in the plans suggested that the conservation area had been taken into account. The Parish Council supported Fulfordgate residents in their comments about the need for an additional access road.

Councillor  ...  view the full minutes text for item 51b

A major full application for the conversion, part demolition and extension of existing convent buildings and erection of 14 three and four storey buildings to provide student residential and ancillary accommodation (660 bed spaces) with vehicle access to Lawrence Street. [Fishergate Ward] [Site Visit].

Consideration was given to a major full application for the conversion, part demolition and extension of existing convent buildings and the erection of 14 three and four storey buildings to provide student accommodation with vehicle access to Lawrence Street.

Officers provided an update to the committee report, full details of which are attached to the online agenda for this meeting, the main points were as follows:

·        Further information on students and car ownership and the legality issues of not allowing private car ownership.

·        Landscape officer comments on trees for removal.

·        Further comment on the access arrangements to the cemetery for the Nuns to confirm they are happy with the proposals.

Natasha Rowland spoke as the agent on behalf of the applicant. She circulated a document to show the intended finish of the buildings. She advised that the Diocese chose the applicant as the preferred developer due to the sympathetic proposals put forward and the nuns have been fully consulted. The student accommodation would be comfortable, practical and high specification. Intensive consultation had been carried out with Officers and English Heritage. The aim of the proposals was to create a car free environment but to address concerns a travel plan and management plan had been produced with a heavy focus on discouraging student to bring cars. Trees and orchard retained. Conversion of listed buildings with minimal intervention.

Councillor Watson spoke to advise that too many student units were being approved in the city and raised concerns about the impact of the materials being used upon the listed building. He also asked that if possible, a separate entrance be put in place for the nuns to access the cemetery as they were unlikely to object to the current plans themselves.

Members queried a number of points as follows:

·        Some Members queried why an additional pedestrian and cycle refuge was not being provided at the front of the site.

·        Whether any units would be provided for families within the site. The applicants agent confirmed that some units are larger and that this could be looked at.

·        Some Members agreed with Councillor Watsons’ comments that the nuns may not be fully happy with the current arrangements for access to the cemetery and asked if the applicant could re-visit the access situation if current circumstances surrounding the land ownership changed. It was confirmed this could be done.

Members entered debate and made the following comments:

·        The application was positive in terms of use and would help towards easing the pressure on local housing.

·        Some Members had concerns about access and egress into the site on Lawrence Street and considered that slow moving cyclists and pedestrians would need something in the middle of the road to aid them.

·        Members were pleased to see a sympathetic design in keeping with the history of the site.

·        Some Members felt that the proposed cladding being used within the scheme was not sympathetic to the historic surroundings and that better access to the cemetery was required for the nuns, despite  ...  view the full minutes text for item 51c

A listed building consent application for internal and external alterations to Convent buildings to provide student accommodation and ancillary facilities with erection of a two storey extension to the infirmary wing. [Fishergate Ward] [Site Visit].

Consideration was given to a listed building consent application for internal and external alterations to Convent buildings to provide student accommodation and ancillary facilities with the erection of a two storey extension to the infirmary wing.

This item was considered in conjunction with related agenda item 4c.

Resolved:           That the application be approved.

Reason:              The proposals reasonably preserve the heritage assets on site; the convent buildings and the boundary walls.  The alterations proposed have a low impact, which is out-weighed by the overall benefits of the proposals.  The proposals are compliant with the National Planning Policy Framework in this respect. 

The site has been marketed and other interested parties proposals, such as private housing, did not include re-use of the convent building.  The proposals within this application retain the listed buildings on site and give them a new use which is consistent with their conservation and in the interests of their long-term viability.  The new buildings proposed would reasonably retain the landscaped setting and provide new development which is of high quality and respectful of its context.

In consideration of the proposals the Local Planning Authority has given adequate consideration to the requirements of Section 16 of the of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

A major full application for the erection of three-storey building for the Biology Department. [Heslington Ward] [Site Visit].

Consideration was given to a major full application for the erection of a three storey building for the biology department at the University of York.

Philip Holmes had registered to speak as the agent on behalf of the applicant. He advised the proposed scheme was for a bio-medical and natural sciences building which would replace the current departmental building which dates from the 1960s. Views from Walmgate Stray would not be obstructed and trees would be retained at the site. He acknowledged that 88 parking spaces would be lost.

Officers gave an update to the committee report, full details of which are attached to the online agenda for information, the main points were as follows:

·        The Council’s Environmental Protection Unit had provided a consultation response and suggested a number of additional conditions.

·        Heslington Parish Council had confirmed they do not object to the application.

·        The site layout had been amended to deal with concerns in terms of impact upon trees.

Members questioned a number of points, in particular the loss of 88 parking spaces in relation to 40 new jobs being created. The agent confirmed that the University would monitor the parking situation for both cars and cycles and would provide more spaces if there was a need. The University was also intending to renew its travel plan over the summer. In response to concerns raised by Members about landscaping and the impact on trees, it was reported that following a revision to the site layout since the committee report was prepared, the Council’s landscape architect was now satisfied with the scheme.

Members entered debate and commented that they recognised the important work being carried out at the University and providing the landscaping issues were addressed with conditions they were happy to approve the application.

Resolved:           That the application be approved subject to the conditions detailed in the report and update to the committee.

Reason:              The current Biology Department comprises a mix of single storey CLASP concrete panel buildings with more recently constructed curtain wall clad buildings including Biological Sciences Phase 1 directly to the south. Planning permission is sought for the erection of phase II of the expansion of Biomedical and Natural Sciences to the north west of the main complex. It would be linked to phase 1 by a high level bridge and it would reflect the same pattern of scale, massing and palette of materials. It is felt that the proposal would not have an adverse impact upon the visual amenity of the wider street scene and that it would not have an adverse impact upon the setting of Walmgate Stray. The proposed building would furthermore form an additional component of the wider programme to improve the quality and range of Science teaching and research at the University in order to develop it further as a centre of excellence.

                             Following the receipt of revisions to address the issues raised by the Landscape Architect,  the proposal was therefore felt to be acceptable in planning terms.

This  report (presented to both Planning Committee and the Sub Committee) informs Members of the Council’s performance in relation to appeals determined by the Planning Inspectorate from 1^st October and 31^st December 2014, and provides a summary of the salient points from appeals determined in that period. A list of outstanding appeals to date of writing is also included.

Members received a report which informed them of the Council’s performance in relation to appeals determined by the Planning Inspectorate from 1 October to 31 December 2014, and which provided them with a summary of the salient points from appeals determined in that period. A list of outstanding appeals to date was also included in the report.

Resolved:           That the report be noted.

Reason:     To inform Members of the current position in relation to planning appeals against the Council’s decisions as determined by the Planning Inspectorate.