Agenda and minutes

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 the attached sheet for further guidance for Members.]

Members were asked to declare at this point in the meeting any disclosable pecuniary interests or other registrable interests that they might have in the business on the agenda, if they had not already done so in advance on the Register of Interests.

Cllrs Melly and Clarke noted that they were pre-determined on item 4c (Tramways Club, Mill Street, YO1 9PY).  They had registered to speak on the item in their capacity as Ward Councillors.  They subsequently left the meeting after they had addressed the committee and took no part in the debate or decision making for that item.     

To approve and sign the minutes of the last Planning Committee B meetings held on 15 November and 12 December 2023.

Resolved:  That the minutes of the last meeting held on 15 November and 12 December 2023 were approved as a correct record.

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 Monday, 15 January 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.

This item invites Members to determine the following planning applications:

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

Conversion of Nos. 100-102 to provide 4no. dwellings with external alterations and extensions. Erection of 1 no. dwelling to the rear and parking. (resubmission).  [Fulford and Heslington Ward]

Members considered a full application by Bootham Developments LLP for the Conversion of Nos. 100-102 to provide 4no. dwellings with external alterations and extensions. Erection of 1 no. dwelling to the rear and parking. (resubmission)

The Development Manager gave a presentation on the plans and the Development Management Officer provided an update which noted, in relation to paragraph 1.7, that the decision on application reference 22/02437/FUL had been quashed by the Court and remitted back to the LPA for re-determination. It also summarised one additional representation.  The officer’s recommendation remained for approval, subject to the conditions set out within the report.

Members sought clarification regarding the bat survey and the Senior Ecologist reported that condition 3 required a licence from Natural England prior to demolition, therefore any bat roost was legally protected.

It was also confirmed by officers that the parking plans were considered sufficient for the site.

Public Speakers

Parish Cllr Mary Urmston spoke in objection to the application on behalf of Fulford Parish Council.  She raised concerns in relation to the damage to the character of the non-designated heritage asset, the difficulties with access to the site and the bat survey.

In response to questions from Members Parish Cllr Urmston stated that a full bat survey had not been carried out and that a derogation test was required.

Cllr Ravilious, the Ward Councillor, had registered to speak in objection to the application.  As she was unable to attend the meeting, the Chair read out her statement.  She raised concerns regarding the access and parking arrangements.

Lee Vincent, the agent for the applicant, spoke in support of the application.  He outlined the plans for small dwellings, similar to those on Main Street, with limited change to the street scene.  He acknowledged the limitations of the onsite parking arrangements, noting that vehicles would be able to enter and exit in forward gear.

In response to questions from Members, he stated that he was not aware of how the access to the site worked when it was a dairy.

In response to further questions from Members, Officers clarified the measurements for the entrance to the site and reported that:

·        Condition 14 could be amended, if required, to ensure that the cycle storage was covered.

·        The internal structure of the semi-detached properties would be entirely new, with the façade on Main Street being retained.

·        Nothing could happen on site until the bat licence was issued, as per the conditions. Natural England were known to reject applications on the basis of over mitigation.

·        The buildings and site were not necessarily suitable for swifts, the provision of bird boxes should be site specific and based on the survey data.

Following debate, Cllr Fenton moved the officer recommendation to approve the application, the motion was seconded by the Chair.

Members voted unanimously in favour of the recommendation and it was:

Resolved:            That the application be approved, subject to the completion of a s106 agreement and the amendment to condition 4 to require 2 Swift boxes  ...  view the full minutes text for item 60.

Flood alleviation scheme comprising a pumping station and associated inlet structure, control kiosk, access track and parking area; culvert under Selby Road; outfall structure and floodwall alignment and penstock across Germany Beck; two earth flood embankments, and a temporary construction compound and tree works within the Fulford Conservation Area.  [Fulford and Heslington Ward]

Members considered a full application by City of York Council for a Flood alleviation scheme comprising a pumping station and associated inlet structure, control kiosk, access track and parking area; culvert under Selby Road; outfall structure and floodwall alignment and penstock across Germany Beck; two earth flood embankments, and a temporary construction compound and tree works within the Fulford Conservation Area.

The Development Manager gave a presentation on the plans and the Development Management Officer provided an update which summarised an additional representation and amended planning conditions as follows:

Archaeology condition 4

Condition 4 needs to be split into two separate conditions and should read as follows:

4.  No development or archaeological investigation shall take place until a written scheme of investigation (WSI) for all outlined archaeological works has been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing. For land that is included within the WSI, no development shall take place other than in accordance with the agreed WSI. The WSI should conform to standards set by LPA and the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists.

Reason: The site is considered to be an area of archaeological interest. Therefore, the development may affect important archaeological deposits which must be recorded prior to destruction, in accordance with Section 16 of the NPPF.

New 5.A programme of post-determination archaeological mitigation, specifically an archaeological watching brief, metal detecting survey and excavation is required on this site.

The archaeological scheme comprises 3 stages of work. Each stage shall be completed and agreed by the Local Planning Authority before it can be approved.

A)   The site investigation and post-investigation assessment shall be completed in accordance with the programme set out in the approved Written Scheme of Investigation and the provision made for analysis, publication and dissemination of results and archive deposition will be secured. This part of the condition shall not be discharged until these elements have been fulfilled in accordance with the programme set out in the WSI.

B)   A copy of a report (and evidence of publication if required) shall be deposited with City of York Historic Environment Record to allow public dissemination of results within 3 months of completion or such other period as may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: The site is considered to be an area of archaeological interest. Therefore, the development may affect important archaeological deposits which must be recorded prior to destruction, in accordance with Section 16 of the NPPF.

Archaeology condition 6

Condition 6 needs to be reworded to remove reference to “The Fulford Battlefield Society and other Interested Parties.”

Additional Informative to condition 6

In relation to the scheme of interpretation, it is recommended the Fulford Battlefield Society, the Parish Council and any other interested parties are consulted and involved prior to the submission of the final scheme for approval to the Local Planning Authority. 

Officers confirmed that the recommendation remained for approval subject to the conditions set out within the report and as amended above.

In response to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 61.

Erection of residential building to form 35no. apartments with associated landscaping and public realm improvements to adjacent Rest Gardens following demolition of former Tramways Club. [Guildhall Ward]

Members considered a major full application for the erection of residential building to form 35no. apartments with associated landscaping and public realm improvements to adjacent Rest Gardens following demolition of former Tramways Club.

The Development Manager gave a presentation on the plans and the Principal Development Management Officer provided an update which outlined an additional representation from the Civic Trust and an additional comment from the council’s Public Realm Operations Manager.  Condition 22 was amended to read as follows:

Landscaping – condition 22

The hard landscaping measures as shown on the landscape masterplan shall be implemented prior to first occupation of the development hereby permitted.

Within a period of six months of commencement of the development a soft landscaping scheme shall be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and fully installed in accordance with the approved details.  Prior to first occupation of the development, a completion notice shall be served on the Local Planning Authority and approval in writing shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority that the approved scheme has been satisfactorily provided.   

The Officer’s recommendation remained for approval subject to the conditions set out within the report and as amended above.

In response to questions from Members, it was confirmed that a condition regarding holiday lets was not required as using the properties for holiday lets would result in a material change of use requiring planning permission.

Public Speakers

Margaret Rollinson, a local resident, spoke in objection to the application.  She raised concerns regarding the height of the proposed development as she felt it was not in keeping with the conservation area.  She also highlighted the limited parking available currently, and stated that the parking would be much worse in the future if the application was to be approved.

In response to questions, she stated it was difficult to get tradespeople to attend properties when there was no parking in the area.  She raised concerns in relation to the limitations that cycles have, if they are the only means of transport for residents in the development.

Cllrs Melly and Clarke, Guildhall Ward Cllrs, spoke in objection to the application.  They highlighted the development’s proximity to the city walls and noted that it did not provide for affordable housing.  They felt that there should be a condition to prevent holiday lets and expressed concerns regarding the practicalities of the basement cycle storage.

In response to questions from Members in relation to the planned ‘rest’ garden, they stated that greater consultation with residents was needed and that the developers should maintain the garden in perpetuity.

Richard France, the Developer, spoke in support of the application.  He stated that they had collaborated with CYC officers to develop the brownfield site and meet the city’s housing need.  They had acted on comments and reduced the height and massing of the development.  He stated that short term lets would be prohibited.

In response to questions, he confirmed they were willing to come to an agreement on the planting scheme, noting  ...  view the full minutes text for item 62.

This report informs Members of planning appeal decisions determined by the Planning Inspectorate between 1 April and 30 June 2023.

The Development Manager presented a report which provided information on the planning appeal decision determined by the Planning Inspectorate between 01 April and 30 June 2023.

It was reported that the council had lost more appeals than usual recently.  There had been four cases since 2018 where costs had been awarded against the council.

Resolved:            That the report be noted.

Reason:              To keep members informed of the current position of planning appeals against the council’s decisions as determined by the Planning Inspectorate.