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.

Members were asked to declare, at this point in the meeting, any personal interests, not included on the Register of Interests, or any prejudicial or disclosable pecuniary interests they may have in respect of business on the agenda. Cllr Pavlovic declared a pecuniary interest in the Carlton Tavern application as he had a previous business relationship with the developer involved with the alternative proposal to the planning application. Cllr Reid declared a pecuniary interest as her son lives in Shelley House, adjacent to the Carlton Tavern site.

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 14 September 2017 (to follow).

Resolved:  That the minutes of the last meeting held on 14 September 2017 be approved and then 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 Tuesday 17 October 2017. 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 that, subject to available resources, this meeting will be filmed and webcast, or recorded, including 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/download/downloads/id/11406/protocol_for_webcasting_filming_and_recording_of_council_meetings_20160809.pdf

It was reported that there had been no registrations to speak at the meeting under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme on general matters within the remit of the Planning Committee.

Members considered a schedule of reports of the Assistant Director, Planning and Public Protection, relating to the following planning applications, outlining the proposals and relevant policy considerations and setting out the views of consultees and officers.

Erection of three-four storey 74no. bedroom care home with associated parking, cycle racks and landscaping following demolition of existing public house. [Site Visit][Holgate Ward]

[Note: Councillors Reid and Pavlovic withdrew from the meeting during consideration of  this item and took no part in the debate or decision thereon.]

Members considered a major full application by Crown Care for the construction of a three-four storey 74 bedroom care home with associated parking, cycle racks and landscaping following the  demolition of the existing Carlton Lodge Public House. 

Officers provided an update to Members. Members were advised that that there had been additional submitted drawings, an email from a third party which had been forwarded to Officers in relation to a potential bid, an objection in relation to boundary impact, and an additional 40 letters of objection.

Duncan Marks, representing York Civic Trust, spoke in objection to the application. He stated that York Civic trust strongly objected to the proposed demolition of the Carlton Tavern due to it being a heritage asset on the city’s local list, and a building of historical importance, as an example of late Victorian Tudor revivalism designed by  Walter Green Penty. This included the aesthetic of the vertical wall hung tiles, which was a style that was being increasingly recognised nationally. He highlighted the loss of other buildings designed by Penty and added that Carlton Tavern had a rich history of serving the local community.

Dave Rowsell, on behalf of Friends of Carlton Tavern then spoke, also in objection to the application. He noted the use of the lift and the impact of the loss of car parking spaces, suggesting. that this would have a negative impact on parking in the vicinity. He also cited the public use of facilities as a safeguarding concern, asking how the safeguarding of residents at the proposed care home could be ensured when the cafe was open to the public.

Louise Ennis, a local resident, addressed the Committee in objection to the application and she provided additional points in relation to her objection. She outlined the benefits versus the harm to the Carlton Tavern as a heritage and community asset. She suggested that there had been a lack of consultation and noted the level of public objection to the proposed application. She asserted that the evidence demonstrated that consultation was inadequate, that community needs and experts’ views on heritage significance were disregarded, and that the harm to the whole community from the loss of the Carlton Tavern outweighed the benefit.

Roy Wallington, CYC Programme Director for Older Persons’ Accommodation then addressed the committee. He advised that there was a rise in the number of over 90 year olds in York, and that dementia care was in huge demand in York. He noted that Oakhaven would be redeveloped to provide care for elderly people to live independently and there was a need to build 10 care homes to keep pace with the rapidly changing population.In response to Members’ questions, he  explained that integration and support were key to the city and most care homes in the city accommodated people that have moved  ...  view the full minutes text for item 41.

Erection of 80 bedroom care home with associated landscaping, infrastructure and car parking.[Site Visit] [Heworth Ward]

Members considered a major full application by Ashley House Plc for the construction of an 80 bedroom care home with associated landscaping, infrastructure and car parking.  

Officers provided an update to Members which detailed an amendment to condition 19 and an additional planning condition.

In response to Members’ questions, it was clarified that:

·        The reference to sustainable features is included in the policy requirement for BREAM, which was very good.

·        The trees at the front of the site would be retained and the trees to the south would be removed.

Following discussion it was:

Resolved: That the application be approved subject to the conditions listed in the report and  the amended and additional conditions below.

Amendment to condition 19

The premises shall be used only as a Care Home within Use Class C2 and shall not be used for any other purpose, including any other purpose in Class C2 of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987, as amended, or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any Statutory Instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order.

Reason:     In order to allow a consideration of the impact of any changes on amenity.

Additional planning condition

The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied unless or until the carriageway and footway basecourses and street lighting to the new estate road, up to and including the exit point from the site, have been constructed. 

Reason:     To ensure appropriate access and egress to the building, in the interests of highway safety and the convenience of prospective residents.

Reasons:

(i)  The provision of a care home on this brownfield site complies with relevant local and national policy. It is considered that the proposal makes good use of the site which is in a sustainable location and will provide much needed older persons’ accommodation for the city.

(ii) It is considered that The design will be a positive addition to the site and that impact on neighbouring residents will be minimal given that the site was previously in use as a school and therefore recommend the application for approval subject to planning conditions.

Change of use of part of OS Field 0042 from agricultural land to extension to existing cemetery. [Site Visit] [Huntington/New Earswick Ward]

Members considered a full application by Huntington Parish Council for the change of use of part of OS Field 0042 from agricultural land to extension to existing cemetery.

Following consideration it was:

Resolved:     That the application be approved subject to the conditions listed in the report.

Reasons:

(i)      In addition to the harm to the York  Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, it is considered that the development would impact on openness, because openness is considered to be an 'absence of development'. However it is considered that the operationa development would not be readily seen from outside the site, with an absence of visual intrusion. As such it is considered that subject to a landscape/ecological management plan, to include the retention of existing trees and hedges, (except where access is required), the development will not impact on the amenity of the area.

(ii)      The proposed development is required to enable the extension of the existing cemetery to accommodate future demand in the Parishes of Huntington, New Earswick and Earswick. The land has already been acquired, and will enable the continued operation of the cemetery in a manner that benefits local people. Works carried out on the existing site, will enable the implementation of additional land in a manner that is low key, and utilises existing employees, equipment and a storage building. Furthermore it can be managed in a manner that benefits nature conservation. Furthermore the principle of development has already been agreed.

(iv)    As such, even when substantial weight is given to the harm to the Green Belt, it is considered that the cumulative weight of the considerations above are sufficient to clearly outweigh the harm to the Green Belt and any other harm and that the very special circumstances necessary to justify the development exist.

Erection of a single storey production building. [SiteVisit] [Bishopthorpe Ward]

Members considered a full application by Yorvale Icecream Ltd

for the construction of a single storey production building.

Members were provided with an update which reported that the Flood Risk Assessment referred to in the conclusion of the report had been received that afternoon. The submission was to be considered in due course and therefore the recommendation remained unchanged.

Following consideration it was:

Resolved: That the Committee:

i)      Delegate authority to Officers to approve the application on the receipt of adequate flood risk information that would result in a positive sequential test, and receipt of satisfactory drainage information.

ii)   Delegate authority to Officers to refuse the application if adequate flood risk information that would result in a positive sequential test and receipt of satisfactory drainage information has not been submitted within 3 months of the date of this resolution.

Reason:

In addition to the harm to the York Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, it is considered that the proposal would have a harmful effect on the openness of the Green Belt when one of the most important attributes of Green Belts are their openness and that the proposal would undermine two of the five Green Belt purposes. Substantial weight is attached to the harm that the proposal would cause to the Green Belt. The harm to the Green Belt is added to by the harm to the visual character and amenity identified in this report.

However it is an established successful business that currently exists on the site and whilst the proposed development would be a significant increase on the existing host building it would be sited on a partially enclosed site on the edge of the confines of the farm and factory complex. Relocation to another site would break the functional link and remove the farm-based marketing value. There is considered to be a functional link of the ice cream business to the farm activity and the importance of the "provenance" of the ice cream, frozen yoghurt, and kefir. As such it is considered that cumulatively 2 factors the report are considered to have sufficient weight to clearly outweigh the harms to the Green Belt and other harms identified in this report even when substantial weight is given to the harm to the Green Belt. Therefore the very special circumstances necessary to justify the development exist.

This report (presented to both Planning Committee and the Area Planning Sub Committee) informs Members of the Council’s performance in relation to appeals determined by the Planning Inspectorate between 1 April and 30 June 2017, and provides a summary of the salient points from appeals determined in that period.

Members received a report highlighting the Council’s performance in relation to appeals determined by the Planning Inspectorate between 1 April and 30 June 2017 and providing a summary of the salient points from appeals determined in that period. A list of outstanding appeals at date of writing was also included.

Resolved:           That Members note the content of this report.

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