Agenda and minutes

At this point, members are asked to declare any personal or prejudicial interests they may have in the business on this agenda.

Members were invited to declare at this point in the meeting any personal or prejudicial interest they might have in the business on the agenda.

Councillor Simpson-Laing declared a personal prejudicial interest in Agenda item 4 (Fulford Road Conservation Area Appraisal: Results of Consultation and Final Draft for Approval) as her parents and other relatives lived within and adjacent to the area covered by this draft appraisal and she left the room and took no part in the discussion or voting thereon. 

Councillor D’Agorne declared a personal non-prejudicial interest in Agenda item 4 (Fulford Road Conservation Area Appraisal: Results of Consultation and Final Draft for Approval) as a resident of Broadway West adjacent to the area.

Councillor Firth declared a personal non-prejudicial interest in Agenda item 4 (Fulford Road Conservation Area Appraisal: Results of Consultation and Final Draft for Approval) as he had served at the Imphal Barracks and was still associated with its Mess.

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 5.00pm on Tuesday 16 February 2010. 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.

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 application:

Members considered a report of the Assistant Director (Planning and Sustainable Development) relating to the following planning application, outlining the proposals and relevant planning considerations and setting out the views of consultees and officers.

Application for a new planning permission to replace an extant planning permission, in order to extend the time limit for implementation of application ref: 09/00632/FUL by a further three years (Mixed scheme use for residential development and offices consisting of a maximum of 12 two bedroom apartments, a maximum of 6 two bedroom houses, a maximum of 60 three bedroom houses and a maximum of 41 four bedroom houses unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority) [Heworth Ward].

Consideration was given to a major full application, submitted by the National Grid, for a new planning permission to replace an extant planning permission, in order to extend the time limit for implementation of application ref: 09/00632/FUL by a further 3 years for a mixed use scheme for residential development and offices. This would consist of a maximum of 12 two bedroom apartments, a maximum of 6 two bedroom houses, a maximum of 60 three bedroom houses and a maximum of 41 four bedroom houses unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Officers updated the Committee on various aspects of the application including:

• Amendment to the description to read ‘Application for a new planning permission to replace an extant planning permission, in order to extend the time limit for implementation …..by a further two years’
• Clarification that this shorter period had been agreed with the applicant and would require a reserved matters application to be submitted within a period of two years from the date of the new planning permission. It was also confirmed that if the reserved matters application was not submitted within the two year period, that the original permission would then lapse and a completely fresh application would be required.
• Yorkshire Water Authority had raised no objections but had advised that their previous comments and recommendations were still relevant and they had requested that the new permission be conditioned accordingly.
• It was reported that no responses had been received from local residents.
• Any approval would be subject to a variation of the existing Section 106 Agreement to encompass the new permission, in order to carry forward the financial contributions and other requirements of the previous permission.
• Details of an issue which had arisen in relation to the Certificate of Ownership in that one of the owners of the site had originally been omitted. Notice had now been served on Northern Gas Networks on 5 February, as the additional owners, which meant that it would be necessary to delay the issuing of the decision until at least 26 February.
• Legal Briefing note which explained the new procedure for the extension of time limits for implementing existing planning permissions which had been brought into force by statutory instrument on 1 October 2009.

Members then commented and queried the following aspects of the application:

·        Lighting along Gas Alley adjacent to the site. Officers confirmed that when detailed proposals for the site were received they could look at how the path related to the site but pointed out that the Secure by Design condition, which formed part of this approval, also covered lighting, surveillance etc.

·        Details of the Section 106 obligations and the various trigger points for meeting these. Officers confirmed that they would email the details to Members. ^1.

·        Community space, which it was confirmed, was the same as had been proposed in the earlier application. It was pointed out that as this was an extension of time application it would be inappropriate for Members to revisit  ...  view the full minutes text for item 37a

This report presents the results of a public consultation exercise on the draft Fulford Road Conservation Area Appraisal which included a boundary review. The report recommends that, following minor revisions, the document be adopted.

Members considered a report, which presented the results of a public consultation exercise on the draft Fulford Road Conservation Area Appraisal which also included a boundary review. The report recommended the adoption of the appraisal subject to a number of minor revisions.

The Planning Committee had approved the draft appraisal for consultation on 24 September 2009. Details of the consultation responses together with Officer responses and recommendations/proposed amendments were set out in Annex C to the report.

Officers confirmed that the adoption of the document would assist with the formulation and determination of development proposals within the Conservation Area and the surrounding area.

Consideration was also given to a letter, circulated at the meeting, from Cllr Taylor. He confirmed that he was in support of the reappraisal of the Fulford Road Conservation Area but as a resident of Fishergate and Heritage Champion for the City of York he requested that consideration should be given to some additional recommendations:

• Inclusion of the former Christian Science Church and former Post Office as superb examples of C20^th architecture;
• Inclusion of the early Council houses of Fulford Cross as they shared many of the characteristics with those of Alma Terrace;
• Inclusion of the Ordnance Lane buildings.

Officers confirmed that following receipt of a number of representations questioning the inclusion of Ordnance Lane they had reassessed its contribution to the area. The draft Appraisal had stated that the area would not justify conservation area status in isolation however records had now shown that the buildings were erected at the start of the C20th and that the hospital predated the buildings by 50 years although it had now been demolished and for this amongst other reasons it was not now proposed for inclusion.

Officers circulated details of English Heritage’s ‘Guidance on Conservation Area Appraisals’, ‘Conservation Area Practice’, Planning Policy Guidance note nos. 15 together with photographs of the former Post Office, Christian Science Church, Ordnance Lane and the properties at Fulford Cross. Officers considered that the above guidance led them to believe that the properties did not meet the criteria for inclusion in the conservation area. In answer to a question, Officers also clarified that their comments for the non-inclusion of Ordnance Lane were based solely on conservation area criteria and assessment rather than on future proposals for the site. 

Cllr D’Agorne referred to a number of possible inclusions in the area, Alma Terrace and the Wellington Public House, which he felt, required projection, also Howard Street and Fulford Cross. He also questioned the suggestion that an assessment be undertaken of trees at the rear of St Oswald’s Road, which were not visible from the Conservation Area. 

Officers suggested that The Wellington could be a candidate for the emerging  local list which contained details of buildings that were of importance and interest to the local community because of their historic or architectural importance. However it has since been confirmed that the Wellington Inn was protected through statutory listing at Grade 11.

The Committee thanked Officers  ...  view the full minutes text for item 38.