Agenda and draft minutes

To receive and note apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received and noted from Cllr Wann.

At this point in the meeting, Members and co-opted members are asked to declare any disclosable pecuniary interest, or other registerable interest, they might have in respect of business on this agenda, if they have not already done so in advance on the Register of Interests. The disclosure must include the nature of the interest.

An interest must also be disclosed in the meeting when it becomes apparent to the member during the meeting.

[Please see attached sheet for further guidance for Members].

Members were asked to declare at this point in the meeting any disclosable pecuniary interest or other registerable interest they might have in respect of business on the agenda, if they had not already done so in advance on the Register of Interests. There were none.

To approve and sign the minutes of the Planning Committee A meetings held on 1 August 2024 and 5 September 2024.

Resolved:  That;

                                         i.    The minutes of the two meetings held on 1 August 2024 were approved as a correct record.

                                        ii.    The minutes of the meeting held on 5 September 2024 were approved as a correct record subject to the following amendments:

·        Minute 118: Remove the word last in the first sentence.

·        First sentence of the last bullet point of minute 122 to change to The separation distances between Forge and Sadlers Closes and the development was 21 metres.

At this point in the meeting members of the public who have registered to speak can do so. Members of the public may speak on agenda items or on matters within the remit of the committee.

Please note that our registration deadlines are set as 2 working days before the meeting, in order to facilitate the management of public participation at our meetings.  The deadline for registering at this meeting is 5:00pm on 22 October 2024. 

To register to speak please visit www.york.gov.uk/AttendCouncilMeetings to fill in an online registration form.  If you have any questions about the registration form or the meeting, please contact Democratic Services.  Contact details can be found at the foot of this agenda.

Webcasting of Public Meetings

Please note that, subject to available resources, this meeting will be webcast including any registered public speakers who have given their permission. The meeting can be viewed live and on demand at www.york.gov.uk/webcasts.

During coronavirus, we made some changes to how we ran council meetings, including facilitating remote participation by public speakers. See our updates (www.york.gov.uk/COVIDDemocracy) for more information on meetings and decisions.

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 A.

This item invites Members to determine the following planning application:

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

Redevelopment of 19 to 33 Coney Street, land to rear of 35 to 37 Coney Street and 39 Coney Street to 2 Spurriergate comprising conversion of retained buildings and new build elements of 3 to 6 storeys to create commercial/business/service floorspace (use class E), purpose-built student accommodation (sui generis) and public realm works including riverside walkway, landscaping and access further to partial demolition of buildings [Guildhall Ward]

This application was considered in conjunction with the following application (site of 19 to 33 Coney Street York 22/02526/LBC).

Members considered a major full application from Helmsley Securities Limited for the redevelopment of 19 to 33 Coney Street, land to rear of 35 to 37 Coney Street and 39 Coney Street to 2 Spurriergate comprising conversion of retained buildings and new build elements of 3 to 6 storeys to create commercial/business/service floorspace (use class E), purpose-built student accommodation (sui generis) and public realm works including riverside walkway, landscaping and access further to partial demolition of buildings.

The Principal Planning Officer gave a presentation including the zones within the scheme. Officers were asked and explained that:

·        A landscaping condition would include the boundary treatment.

·        Regarding the gap on the walkway, the piece of land was not in the ownership of the applicant and would be a later phase of the development.

·        Concerning the amenity spaces within the plans, the operator would decide what those spaces would become.

·        The Coney Street courtyard was level access and there were steps from the courtyard down to the river. There would also be a ramp.

·        Within the two levels there was commercial and retail space and above those would be student accommodation which was not publicly accessible.

·        The walkway in front of the Pitcher and Piano would continue.

Following questions, the Principal Planning Officer gave an update noting corrections to the committee report, clarification on the amounts of development, an amendment to paragraph 5.19 of the committee report, and clarification on condition 30 and the viability review.

Public Speakers

Flick Williams spoke on the application. She explained that the applicant had employed an Access Consultant and had genuinely listed to the views of disabled people and had made changes to the plans accordingly. She commended and thanked the Helmsley Group for their inclusivity.

Andrew Lowson (Executive Director, YorkBID) spoke in support of the application on behalf of YorkBID. He explained that YorkBID had been included in the application for a number of years with proactive engagement from the applicant and it supported the application. He asked what the alternative would be if the plans were not approved and added that the project would significantly enhance the public realm. He commended the Helmsley Group on their approach.

Max Reeves (Development Director, Helmsley Group), the applicant, spoke in support of the application noting that the group had a track record with listed buildings. He explained that the group were looking to realise the opening up of Coney Street riverside with the new public spaces being joined by the riverside walkway. He added that the group had a collaborative approach with the design evolving over three years. He noted that accessibility had been a key approach. He added that the Coney Street riverside was a once in a lifetime project.

Max Reeves was joined by colleagues Tim Ross (O'Neill Associates, planning consultant) and Timur Tatlioglu (Montagu Evans, Heritage Consultant) to answer questions from Members. They  ...  view the full minutes text for item 128.

Internal and external alterations associated with the redevelopment of 19 to 33 Coney Street and 39 Coney Street to 2 Spurriergate (involving conversion and new build elements) following full and partial demolition of buildings [Guildhall Ward]

This application was considered in conjunction with the previous application (site of 19 to 33 Coney Street York 22/02525/FULM). This was an application from Helmsley Securities Limited for Listed Building Consent for internal and external alterations associated with the redevelopment of 19 to 33 Coney Street and 39 Coney Street to 2 Spurriergate (involving conversion and new build elements) following full and partial demolition of buildings. Following debate, Cllr Whitcroft proposed the officer recommendation to approve the application subject to referral to the Secretary of State and the conditions detailed in the published report. This was seconded by Cllr Melly. Following a vote with ten voting in favour and one vote against, it was;

Resolved: That the application be approved subject to referral to the Secretary of State and the conditions detailed in the published report.

Reasons:

1.   The principle of the development, in terms of the composition of uses proposed, accords with the economic and social objectives of the NPPF, in respect of the economy and supporting vibrant communities and delivering a range of homes.  It is also consistent with DLP 2018 policy SS3 which relates to the city centre and its role in achieving the economic and social aspiration of the plan.  In applying the NPPF the decision-maker must give significant weight to the economic benefits of the scheme (paragraph 85) and substantial weight to the delivery of housing that meets an identified need (paragraph 124).  The provision of new public realm is also a substantial benefit the scheme would deliver. 

2.   When a local planning authority finds that a proposed development would harm the special architectural or historic interest of a listed building or would harm the character or appearance of the Conservation Area, the authority must give considerable importance and weight to the desirability of avoiding such harm to give effect to its statutory duties under sections 16 and 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

3.   The scheme would not cause harm to the listed buildings the subject of this application.  The scheme would cause less than substantial harm, at the lower end of the scale, to the character of the Conservation Area.  Substantial public benefits have been identified that clearly outweigh the harm and these are set out in paragraph 5.21 of thes report.

4.   There are multiple public benefits to the scheme which cumulatively are substantial; they are economic, social and environmental.  These public benefits are also to the significance of the listed buildings the subject of this application and include putting them to a use consistent with their conservation, as advocated by NPPF section 16.  The external works improve the significance of the listed buildings, including by better revealing their historic scale and form and the internal works preserve remaining historic plan form and bring the upper floors back into use.  In applying paragraph 196 of the NPPF, which advises that the harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal, the public benefits of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 128a