Agenda and minutes
Venue: The George Hudson Board Room - 1st Floor West Offices (F045). View directions
Declarations of Interest [16.32]
At this point in the meeting, 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.
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. The Chair declared an interest in agenda item 4d [Peppermill Court, Ramsay Close, York 22/02024/FULM] and undertook to withdraw from the meeting for that item, at which time Cllr Pavlovic (Vice Chair) would Chair the remainder of the meeting. No further interests were declared.
Public Participation [16.32]
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 have changed to 2 working days before the meeting, in order to facilitate the management of public participation at meetings. The deadline for registering at this meeting is 5:00pm on Tuesday 31 January 2022.
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.
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.
To approve and sign the minutes of the meetings of the Planning Committee A held on 1 December 2022.
Resolved: That the minutes of the meeting of Planning Committee A held on 1 December 2022 be approved and signed as a correct record.
Plans List [16.33]
This item invites Members to determine the following planning applications:
Members considered a schedule of reports of the Head of Planning and Development Services, relating to the following planning applications, outlining the proposals and relevant policy considerations, and setting out the views of consultees and officers.
Change of use, demolition and erection of new buildings to create residential care community with 172 residential units and communal areas, creation of public open space, sports pitches, public right of way and associated Infrastructure [Guildhall Ward]
Members considered a major full application from Tetlow King Planning (agent) Enterprise Retirement Living Limited and NHS Property Services (applicants) for a Change of use, demolition and erection of new buildings to create residential care community with 172no. residential units and communal areas, creation of public open space, sports pitches, public right of way and associated Infrastructure at Bootham Park Hospital Bootham York.
The Principle Development Management Officer gave an update advising Members of new conditions 21 (cycle route design) and 22 (east access works) and variations to conditions 18 (cycle parking) and 20 (travel plan) and of comments from York Cycle Campaign. It was noted that the report did not comments from Historic England. A presentation on the application was then given.
Brandon Gebka spoke in objection to the application. He noted that the benefits of it were not of enough significance to demolish a grade 2 listed buildings and he noted the impact on the historical setting of the site. He explained that his main concern was the demolition of the estate cottages. In response to a question from a Member he noted that that he had expressed strong concern regarding the application.
Ann Weerakoon spoke in objection to the application. She explained that she represented citizens with an interest in history. She explained that the building could not be left to deteriorate and he plan to demolish the grade 2 parts if the building were unacceptable and he noted his concerns regarding the alterations to grade 1 parts of the building. She added that the new 3 storey building was out of character for the area.
Sylvia Graves, a former Ward Manager at Bootham Park Hospital spoke in objection to the application. She questioned if the new buildings could last 245 years. She then distributed a number of photos of the inside of the hospital at different points in time. In answer to Member questions she explained that she had been around the building with the photographer before the hospital had closed. Asked her view on the hospital’s history of mental health treatment, there needed to be a nod to the history of the building.
Peter Martin, the Applicant, spoke in support of the application. He explained that Bootham Park hospital was one of York’s most historic sites and he believe that a retirement community was the best use of the site, where they would have full support for their needs. He noted that there was evidence that living in an integrated community reduced their need for care. He acknowledged that there were harms and he noted that the applicants had worked hard to minimise this.
Peter Martin had a number of colleagues in attendance to answer Member questions. They were asked and explained that:
How the building materials were selected for the site.
NHS property services was a public body and the site was private. The area that were to be made public access were listed.
How parking would be managed.
Access ... view the full minutes text for item 44a
Demolition, including Pauper Wings and curtilage buildings, internal and external alterations and new buildings in association with change of use to residential care community. Associated external works [Guildhall Ward]
Members considered a listed building consent application from Enterprise Retirement Living Ltd and NHS Property Services Ltd for the Demolition, including Pauper Wings and curtilage buildings, internal and external alterations and new buildings in association with change of use to residential care community. Associated external works at NHS Property Services Limited Bootham Park Hospital Bootham York.
Cllr Fenton proposed the officer recommendation to approve the application subject to referral to the Secretary of State and subject to an additional condition for there to be an acknowledgement to the history of the buildings to be a publicly accessible place. This was seconded by Cllr Daubeney. Following a vote with 8 in favour of the motion and 3 against, it was:
Resolved: That the application be approved following referral to the Secretary of State and subject to an additional condition for there to be an acknowledgement to the history of the buildings to be a publicly accessible place.
i. The Bootham Park Hospital buildings the subject of this application have been vacant since 2017. At that stage the Council did investigate re-use of the site, which was decided against due to high costs and significant risks associated with restoring and developing listed buildings. It is noted that the Council’s preferred option for redevelopment included demolition of Grade II, development to the north of the site and to the east of the Chapel. The applicants were successful in bidding for the site, only at a second round of bidding, after the initial sale failed in 2019.
ii. The scheme for reuse of the site does lead to harm to certain heritage assets. NPPF advice is that, where substantial harm has been identified, consent should be refused unless such harm is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh the harm. The identified harm and public benefits of the scheme are set out below. Officer’s recommendation is that in this case the harm is necessary to deliver the substantial benefits that justify the granting of consent.
Identified harm -
· Substantial harm due to demolition of part of the Grade II listed former pauper wings.
· Less than substantial harm to setting of the Grade II listed Chapel
· A low level of harm to the conservation area due to tree loss, offset due to proposed tree planting which includes semi-mature trees.
· Low level of harm due to replacement of estate cottages with development of larger scale. Impact on setting mitigated due to the secluded location.
Public Benefits -
· Substantial benefits in bringing a complex of listed buildings back into use which have been vacant since 2015. This includes the sensitive restoration and re-use of Grade I buildings which are of exceptional importance.
· Significant benefit of restoring the landscape, expanding its capacity for recreational use and securing public access and ongoing maintenance.
· Restoration of Grade II boundary railings beneficial.
· Provision of specialist accommodation to meet an unmet identified need, with associated health and well-being facilities, recreational facilities and provision of care.
· Housing delivery on a ... view the full minutes text for item 44b
Outline application for erection of business incubator units, warehousing and regional training facility for roofing, biomass and stoves in association with change of use to Class E with all matters reserved [Haxby and Wigginton Ward]
Members considered a major outline application from Oliver Neal for the erection of business incubator units, warehousing and regional training facility for roofing, biomass and stoves in association with change of use to Class E with all matters reserved at Geoff Neal Roofing Factory Sutton Road Wigginton York.
The Head of Planning and Development Services outlined the application and gave a presentation on the application.
Geoff Neal spoke in support of the application on behalf of the applicant. He explained that scheme being educational and attracting inward investment were the reasons for very special circumstances. He explained that it would provide a centre of regional training for roofing and would be a beacon for special training. He noted that the application was supported by the Parish Council and immediate neighbour. He added that the proposal fitted in with commercial buildings in the area and the existing site was well screened by hedges and would increase biodiversity of the site.
In response to questions from Members, Geoff Neal explained:
· How the nature of the training would differ to that offered by York College.
· If the training was sited elsewhere this would be more disruptive.
· There were economic benefits of the scheme to contribute to the very special circumstances.
· The training centre would develop skills in solar thermal roofing, solar photovoltaic (PV) roofing, and battery storage. There was no training for this in the region at present.
Members then asked Officer a number of questions to which they confirmed that:
· The 2005 draft Local Plan considered the site as green belt.
· They had not consulted with economic development colleagues as the site was not allocated as am employment site.
· There were very special circumstances and these were taken on balance.
· They could not say that all the buildings were single storey as the plans were indicative.
Cllr Waudby proposed the officer recommendation to refuse the application. This was seconded by Cllr Fenton. Following a vote with 8 in favour of the motion and 3 against, it was:
Resolved: That the application be refused.
i. The identified harm to the Green Belt is that the proposals are inappropriate development, which is, by definition harmful.
ii. No further harm has been identified that cannot be reasonably mitigated through the use of planning conditions.
iii. The three overarching objectives of the NPPF in achieving sustainable development are economic, social, and environmental. The objective being to secure net gains across each objective.
iv. The economic objective is to help build a strong, responsive, and competitive economy, by ensuring that sufficient land of the right types is available in the right places and at the right time to support growth, innovation, and improved productivity; and by identifying and coordinating the provision of infrastructure.
v. The proposed development will supplement the existing warehouse use on site and provide opportunities for purpose formed training space where craft trades can be taught in classrooms with workshop space.
vi. The site is currently in the general extent of ... view the full minutes text for item 44c
Erection of 3-storey student accommodation with associated landscaping [Guildhall Ward]
Cllr Pavlovic (Vice Chair), chaired the remainder of the meeting following the withdrawal of Cllr Cullwick (Chair). Cllr Waudby proposed Cllr Fenton as Vice Chair of the Committee. This was seconded by Cllr Fisher. Following a unanimous vote in favour, Cllr Fenton was appointed as Vice Chair for the remainder of the meeting.
Members considered a major full application from York St John University for the Erection of 3-storey student accommodation with associated landscaping at Peppermill Court, Ramsay Close, York. The Principle Development Management Officer outlined and gave a presentation on the application.
Cllr Melly lived in the neighbourhood of the application site and spoke in objection to the application. She supported student accommodation on the site, but explained that the scheme needed to be well designed. She explained that residents felt that the scheme was overdevelopment and she added that it removed existing parking which would have further impacts on car parking in the area. She explained that there were concerns about students moving in and out of the accommodation and the impact of noise on residential amenity. She distributed a photo showing the distance from the scheme to residential properties.
In answer to questions from Members, Cllr Melly explained that:
· Where car parking was being displaced.
· Some students and staff brought cars and there was a loss of parking on Ramsay Close.
· There was little screening between the scheme and residential houses.
· A number of residents had their living room on the first floor and this would be impacted by the scheme.
· She was not aware of any respark.
· The permit parking on Ramsay Close was managed by York St John University.
Cllr Fitzpatrick, Ward Member for Guildhall Ward, spoke on behalf of residents. She explained that residents were not against the principle of the accommodation, but they did not believe that enough weight had been given to the loss of amenity for residents. She suggested that the student social area would not be a quiet study area. She explained residents concerns regarding the 3m wall and she suggested an alternative layout. She noted that as Ward Councillor she wanted to work with the university.
In response to Member questions, Cllr Fitzpatrick noted that:
· There was a fair amount of opposition to the application locally.
· Regarding engagement from the university, Cllr Melly had organised a meeting with residents.
· [With regard to permit parking, the Principal Development Management Officer demonstrated the R25 and R26 respark areas]
· There was mixed parking in the area.
Nick Coakley (Director of Estates Management & Development at York St John University) spoke in support as the Applicant. He explained that the university was enjoying a sustained period of success and that it was expanding a number of services, including midwifery for which there needed to be accommodation close to the university. He advised that the university would be committing sums of money to subsidise rents, which would be 30-40% below the private market for rates. He added that there would be no ... view the full minutes text for item 44d