COMMITTEE REPORT

 

Date:

9 June 2022

Ward:

Micklegate

Team:

West Area

Parish:

Micklegate Planning Panel

Reference:

20/02421/FULM

Application at:

Land To The Rear Of Mill House North Street York 

For:

Erection of hotel, associated works and infrastructure

By:

Mr Reeves

Application Type:

Major Full Application

Target Date:

13 June 2022

Recommendation:

Approve

 

1.0 PROPOSAL

 

1.1    The proposal is for a six storey hotel with associated works. The scheme has been revised from the original eight storey proposal. The current scheme includes an amended roof form and set back at the upper floors to reduce massing.

 

1.2    The site is an existing car park to the rear of Mill House and within the Central Historic Core Conservation Area (Character area 21: Micklegate). Surrounding buildings include commercial properties on George Hudson Street, Micklegate Travelodge and the former Church of St John the Evangelist and vary between one and nine storeys in height. The site is only clearly visible at the access to the car park from North Street between Mill House and The Whippet Inn. The site was cleared in the late 20th century and had at that point most recently been used for warehousing and a print works.

 

1.3    There are a number of listed buildings surrounding the site including the Grade II listed Whippet Inn and properties on George Hudson Street and Grade II* listed Church of St John the Evangelist. The Grade I listed All Saints Church and St Martins Church sit slightly away from the site. The Park Inn hotel, identified as a detractor in the Conservation Area Appraisal is an eight storey building sitting opposite the entrance to the site on North Street.

 

 

2.0 POLICY CONTEXT

 

National Planning Policy Framework

 

2.1    The revised National Planning Policy Framework (‘NPPF’) sets out the government's planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied.

 

2.2    The planning system should contribute to the achievement of sustainable development (Paragraph 7).  To achieve sustainable development, the planning system has three overarching objectives; economic, social and environmental objectives. Paragraph 11 advises that at the heart of the Framework there is a presumption in favour of sustainable development.

 

Publication Draft Local Plan 2018

 

2.3    The Publication Draft City of York Local Plan 2018 ('2018 Draft Plan') was submitted for examination on 25 May 2018. Phase 1 of the hearings into the examination of the Local Plan took place in December 2019. In accordance with paragraph 48 of the NPPF the Draft Plan policies can be afforded weight according to:

-The stage of preparation of the emerging plan (the more advanced the preparation, the greater the weight that may be given);

- The extent to which there are unresolved objections to relevant policies (the less significant the unresolved objections, the greater the weight that may be given); and

- The degree of consistency of the relevant policies in the emerging plan to the policies in the previous NPPF published in March 2012. (NB: Under transitional arrangements plans submitted for examination before 24 January 2019 will be assessed against the 2012 NPPF). 

 

2.4    Relevant Policies

 

DP1  York Sub Area

DP2  Sustainable Development

DP3  Sustainable Communities

SS1  Delivering Sustainable Growth for York

SS3  York City Centre

EC4  Tourism

D1     Placemaking

D4     Conservation Areas

D5     Listed Buildings

D6     Archaeology

ENV2Managing Environmental Quality

ENV3Land Contamination

ENV4Flood Risk

ENV5Sustainable Drainage

T1     Sustainable Access

CC1  Renewable and Low Carbon Energy Generation and Storage

CC2  Sustainable Design and Construction of New Development

 

2005 Development Control Local Plan

 

2.5    The Development Control Local Plan (‘DCLP’) was approved for development management purposes in April 2005. Whilst the DCLP does not form part of the statutory development plan, its policies are considered to be capable of being material considerations in the determination of planning applications where policies relevant to the application are consistent with those in the NPPF albeit with very limited weight.

 

3.0 CONSULTATIONS

 

INTERNAL

 

Public Protection

 

3.1    Conditions recommended regarding issues related to noise mitigation; noise, vibration and dust during construction; EVCP; and land contamination.

 

Waste Management

 

3.2    General advice given regarding collection points, provision of sufficient bin storage and retention of access to bins for other nearby businesses during, and after, construction.

 

Design, Conservation and Sustainable Development (Conservation)

 

3.3    Supportive of the scheme in its revised form. The main changes are a reduction in height to respond to the eaves’ levels of the existing context; split floor levels internally to create a stepped massing that bridges the differing levels around the site; reduction in mass of the top floors by setting in these levels from the front and back facades; and a revised roof form from a simple pitched roof to a saw-tooth roof form in reference to the site’s industrial/ commercial history. As well as reflecting the surrounding context the roof also provides a sympathetic location for photovoltaics. Impact on the setting of the Grade II* former Church of St John the Evangelist and Grade I listed All Saints Church will also now be very limited.

 

Design, Conservation and Sustainable Development (Archaeology)

 

3.4    Comments provided in relation to the proposal as revised. The scheme as currently considered aims to preserve as much archaeology (including Roman and early medieval) in-situ as possible. Impacts on archaeological deposits will occur as a result of construction of foundations, installation of services, and potential changes to groundwater movement through the use of piles through anoxic deposits or by cutting off from the river. The scheme will substantially impact upon medieval archaeological deposits with organic content currently characterised as backyard deposits of medium significance. To allow viable construction to be achieved given the strict constraints above ground on this site development could be accepted under a range of strict archaeological conditions.

 

Highway Network Management

 

3.5    There are 18 spaces, and 2 disabled spaces provided for staff and visitors to Mill House. There are other recent examples of hotels in York with zero parking provision and the principle is acceptable in principle. There are 5 universal access rooms within the hotel and no disabled parking provision in the immediate vicinity of the site; the scheme should therefore include at least one disabled parking space.

 

Cycle parking provision is in line with guidance however there are issues with the cycle parking and changes should be provided to show the Sheffield stands in the external cycle storage 1.2m apart to allow for non-standard bikes. The doors to the cycle store should be 1.2m wide and automatic.

 

Flood Risk Management Team

 

3.6    To be updated at committee.

 

 

 

 

EXTERNAL

 

Micklegate Planning Panel

 

3.7    Rooms are inadequate in size and little evidence is provided that this is a net zero, carbon neutral development. The comments of Historic England are supported; it is not considered that because the site is hidden away that architecture should be mediocre.

 

Yorkshire Water

 

3.8    Details can be dealt with via conditions.

 

North Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service

 

3.9    No objections at this stage, further comment will be made under Building Regulations consultation.

 

North Yorkshire Police

 

3.10  Following concern expressed around levels of anti-social behaviour, assault and cycle theft in the area and the secluded nature of the site and lack of surveillance, discussions have taken place with the developer. It is agreed that appropriately worded conditions controlling external lighting and agreement of a Designing Out Crime Statement would be sufficient to address issues.

 

York Civic Trust

 

3.11  The Trust object to the scheme as it results in a building which is excessively tall and out of character with the surrounding area. They recognise that the site is currently a detractor in the Conservation Area but consider the proposal out of keeping in terms of size and design. The proposal would have a negative impact on several listed buildings and insufficient assessment has been made of the impact on views of the scheme. Further details on landscaping and the treatment of the car park should be required. Further archaeological investigation should also be required given the importance of the location and likelihood of water-logged deposits dating back to the Roman period. Room sizes within the hotel seem small and raise questions about the quality of accommodation proposed.

 

Historic England

 

3.12  In response to the revised scheme, it is accepted that this goes some way to addressing previous concerns. The lowered height of the revised scheme has reduced its negative impact on the setting of the surrounding heritage assets and its prominence within the wider townscape. A further reduction in height would ensure the new building remains subservient to its historic neighbours and better retain hierarchy and historic character. The landscaping of the site is unchanged and it is considered that the development should make more attempt to enliven this area of car parking by reducing parking to the front of the new building and introducing landscaping.

 

Additional information has been provided in the form of an archaeological report on coring and test pitting works. This provides a basic level of information about the stratigraphic sequence on site but no information on foundation design, piling or the location of the lift pit. From this it is not possible to establish the degree of harm to the significance of the site and further work is required.

 

Environment Agency

 

3.13  No objections to the submitted Flood Risk Assessment. The development will only meet the requirements of the NPPF if the development is carried out in accordance with the FRA.

 

Conservation Area Advisory Panel

 

3.14  The comments made on the original scheme were considered relevant still to the revised scheme. They express concern about the size of the rooms and the ability of delivery vehicles to manoeuvre in the car parking area. The reduction in height was welcomed but the choice of materials (brick cladding and an aluminium glazing system) was considered inappropriate in the Conservation Area. No mention is made of the presence of archaeology on site.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4.0 REPRESENTATIONS

 

Neighbour Notification and Publicity

 

4.1    One letter making general comments has been received from a neighbouring business expressing concern that access is retained for delivery vehicles throughout construction and the lifetime of the development.

 

4.2    Four letters of objection have been submitted. These raise the following issues:

- North Street is a poor environment with too many cars, poor road surfaces, insufficient infrastructure for cyclists;

- North Street should be improved with parks and seating and the site should be used for public amenity;

- Hotels do not contribute to community and require increased motor vehicle journeys;

- The proposal will be detrimental to the physical and mental well-being of the people of York as a result of these issues;

- Safe access for non-vehicle users cannot be maintained at all times;

- The proposal does not fit with the Council’s declaration of a climate emergency, walking-cycling strategy or plans to make the city centre motor-traffic free;

- Light into neighbouring property at Mill House and George Hudson Street will be affected;

- Construction impacts on neighbouring businesses and residents;

- Operational impacts of hotel on neighbouring businesses and residents;

- How will safety be ensured with large numbers of people coming and going;

- There is a right of way covenant on the site which is already being impaired by the applicant;

- Retention of access to existing businesses;

- The site will become a magnet for anti-social behaviour as a result of its location and reduced visibility;

- Parking areas are part of lease agreement with companies already within Mill House and should not be included in the site boundary.

 

5.0 APPRAISAL  

 

5.1    Main Issues

- principle of development

- impact on the setting of the listed building

- impact on the character and appearance of the conservation area

- archaeology

- impact on amenity and living conditions of adjacent occupiers

- highways and parking

- drainage and flood risk

- sustainability

 

5.2    The application site is within the Central Historic Core Conservation Area where Section 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (‘1990 Act’) requires that special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area.

 

5.3    The general duty with respect to listed buildings in the exercise of planning functions is contained in Section 66 (1) of the Act 1990. This states that in considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its setting, the local planning authority shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses. Case law has made clear that when deciding whether harm to a conservation area or to a listed building or its setting is outweighed by the advantages of a proposed development, the decision-maker must give particular weight to the desirability of avoiding such harm to give effect to its statutory duties under sections 66 and 72 of the 1990 Act. There is a "strong presumption" against the grant of planning permission in such cases.

 

PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT

 

5.4    Section 7 of the NPPF states that planning decisions should support the role that town centres play at the heart of local communities, by taking a positive approach to their growth, management and adaption. Policy SS3 (York City Centre) of the 2018 Draft Plan states that within the city centre, as defined on the Proposals Map certain development types, including hotels (use class C1) are acceptable in principle. Policy EC4 (Tourism) of the 2018 Draft Plan also supports proposals that maintain and improve the choice and quality of visitor accommodation to encourage overnight stays.

 

5.5    The site is currently a car park area within the city centre. The proposal for a hotel is considered an appropriate use in the city centre and complies with policy SS3 of the 2018 Draft Plan. As such the proposal is acceptable in principle subject to other material planning considerations.

 

IMPACT ON THE DESIGNATED HERITAGE ASSETS

 

5.6    The NPPF defines listed buildings and conservation areas as ‘designated heritage assets’. Paragraph 197 of the NPPF states that with regard to the impact of development on the historic environment, in determining applications, local planning authorities should take account of:

a) the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets

and putting them to viable uses consistent with their conservation;

b) the positive contribution that conservation of heritage assets can make to

sustainable communities including their economic vitality; and

c) the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local

character and distinctiveness.

 

5.7    Paragraph 199 goes onto to say that when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation (and the more important the asset, the greater the weight should be). This is irrespective of whether any potential harm amounts to substantial harm, total loss or less than substantial harm to its significance.

 

5.8    Paragraph 200 states any harm to, the significance of a designated heritage asset (from its alteration or destruction, or from development within its setting), should require clear and convincing justification. Substantial harm to:

 

a) grade II listed buildings, should be exceptional;

b) assets of the highest significance, (including scheduled monuments and grade I and II* listed buildings) , should be wholly exceptional.

 

5.9    Paragraph 130 states that planning decisions should ensure that developments:

a) will function well and add to the overall quality of the area, not just for the short term but over the lifetime of the development;

b) are visually attractive as a result of good architecture, layout and appropriate and effective landscaping;

c) are sympathetic to local character and history, including the surrounding built environment and landscape setting, while not preventing or discouraging appropriate innovation or change (such as increased densities);

d) establish or maintain a strong sense of place, using the arrangement of streets, spaces, building types and materials to create attractive, welcoming and distinctive places to live, work and visit;

e) optimise the potential of the site to accommodate and sustain an appropriate amount and mix of development (including green and other public space) and support local facilities and transport networks; and

f) create places that are safe, inclusive and accessible and which promote health and well-being, with a high standard of amenity for existing and future users; and where crime and disorder, and the fear of crime, do not undermine the quality of life or community cohesion and resilience.

 

5.10  Policy D1 of the 2018 Draft Plan states that proposals will be supported where they improve poor existing urban and natural environments, enhance York’s special qualities and better reveal the significances of the historic environment. Development proposals that fail to take account of York’s special qualities, fail to make a positive design contribution to the city, or cause damage to the character and quality of an area will be refused. Policies D4 and D5 of the 2018 Draft Plan set out how proposals affecting conservation areas and listed buildings should be considered. Moderate weight can be applied to these draft local policies.

 

5.11  Due to its central location and the scale of the proposal a number of heritage assets are considered in terms of their significance and the impact of the proposal on their significance. In proximity to the site are Grade II listed Whippet Inn and properties on George Hudson Street and Grade II* listed Church of St John the Evangelist. The Grade I listed All Saints Church and St Martins Church sit slightly away from the site.

 

5.12  This is a distinctive part of the Micklegate character area (21) of the Central Historic Core Conservation Area due to its industrial heritage. Mill House is a key example of this legacy and helps to establish the hierarchy along North Street. The proposal site sits between the Grade I listed All Saints Church and the Grade II* listed former Church of St John. The ecclesiastical palette of ashlar stonework contrasts with the red brick of the historic Mill House and the Grade II listed 1896 The Whippet Inn public house that surround the site. All Saints has a distinctive tall and slender spire that towers above the dense, lower-scale red brick development that surrounds it creating a characterful mix and juxtaposition.

 

5.13 Prior to the 20th century the site had contained small scale buildings but from the beginning of that century North Street became more industrial in character with warehousing and factories in larger scale buildings becoming more of a feature. Images from the 1920s show a large industrial building on the site, standing proud of neighbouring buildings. The site was cleared in the late 20th century and is now a car park and service area for the properties surrounding the site.

 

5.14 The Central Historic Core Conservation Area Appraisal (Character Area 21) contains little assessment about the character of this area of North Street beyond that it has long been an industrial zone with long continuous building facades. The importance of the medieval churches is noted.

 

5.15  The existing use of the site as a car park/ service area means that the site itself has a neutral impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. While the site has restricted public visibility the haphazard car parking and retaining walls visible from the entrance on North Street are not attractive and the area appears neglected. The scheme, as revised, relates well to neighbouring properties in terms of its height. Eaves level follows through with the surrounding context and a stepped internal floor level helps to create a massing to the building which addresses the differing levels around the site. A set back at the upper floors helps to reduce the massing of the building and further responds positively to neighbouring properties. The saw tooth roof form proposed references the site’s industrial history and reduces bulk at roof level. It is also noted that this provides a sympathetic location for photovoltaic panels to meet the scheme’s sustainability ambitions.

 

5.16  The reduction in the height of the building, compared with the originally submitted scheme, mean that the proposal would have a very limited impact on the setting of the Grade II* former Church of St John the Evangelist and the Grade 1 listed All Saints Church. Images provided in support of the application indicate that the building would not be seen above the Church of St John when viewed from Bridge Street. The church is the lowest of the buildings surrounding the site indicating that the proposal would have very limited visibility from outside the site. Views would be glimpsed at the access point on North Street and, possibly, travelling south along North Street from Tanner Row.

 

5.17  The industrial character of the proposal is in keeping with neighbouring buildings, particularly Mill House, and the previous use of the site. Materials are a mix of buff coloured brickwork with angled reveals at the windows. Windows are dark grey finished aluminium clad timber while the roof is a light grey zinc cladding. The entrance to the building is highlighted in a polished concrete cladding. Around the entrance to the site some landscaping has been added in the form of green walls defining the parking area and pedestrian access. A green wall is added to the side of Mill House to further improve visual amenity.

 

5.18 It is considered that the proposal does not harm the character and appearance of the Conservation Area or the setting of nearby listed buildings. The existing site is previously developed and does little to enhance the visual amenity of the area, while the proposed scheme does respond positively to the local context in terms of its height, massing and appearance while respecting the more industrial character of this part of the Conservation Area. For this reason it is considered that the proposal maintains the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and setting of nearby listed building and complies with the requirements of Section 16 of the NPPF and policy D4 of the emerging Local Plan.

 

ARCHAEOLOGY

 

5.19 The scheme has been amended to address concerns raised by the City Archaeologist in relation to basement levels and the likely substantial impact on organic archaeological deposits of high significance. In previous revision of the proposal, a basement would have required removal of organic archaeological material between 2-3.7m below the current car park surface. This would have included the removal of Anglo-Scandinavian and possibly Roman archaeological deposits.

 

5.20 The latest revision has removed the basement level to achieve the desired outcome of preserving as much archaeology in-situ as possible. The below ground impacts of the development on the archaeological deposits will now include foundation, services and lift shafts, and potential impact on groundwater movements and/or drying out of deposits through the use of piles or by cutting off from the river. The formation levels of the building are now expected to impact into medieval and potentially earlier deposits by approximately 1.0m with pile caps extending further. As a result the revised scheme will substantially impact upon medieval archaeological deposits with organic content of a medium significance. The lift pit and pile caps will impact pre-Conquest archaeology of high significance although their full character is currently unknown given the limited level of investigation undertaken and the information provided.

 

5.21 Footnote 68 to paragraph 200 of the NPPF indicates that non-designated heritage assets of archaeological interest, which are demonstrably of equivalent significance to scheduled monuments, should be considered subject to the policies for designated heritage assets. Investigation in the area around the site over the past 50 years has demonstrated the presence of nationally significant, well preserved, stratified archaeological deposits dating from the Roman period onwards, many of which are water logged. Deeper deposits (early medieval and earlier) on the site are viewed as designated heritage assets until further characterised and impacts on these should be kept to an absolute minimum.

 

5.22 The revised scheme allows the Roman and the majority of early medieval remains to be preserved in-situ. There will be some impact on these from piling and construction of the lift shaft. Text associated with policy D6 of the emerging Local Plan identifies that, within the historic core, substantial harm is defined as greater than 5% disturbance to buried archaeological deposits through foundation design and infrastructure development. While a foundation plan has not been submitted, this can be controlled via condition to ensure that 95% of the most significant archaeological deposits are retained in-situ ensuring harm remains at the less than substantial level. In accordance with paragraph 202 of the NPPF such harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal. In this instance, public benefits are identified in regards to the re-use of a brownfield site, economic benefits associated with the provision of the hotel - creating jobs and providing visitor accommodation – and the potential to revitalise this unattractive area in the city centre. These public benefits are considered to outweigh the less than substantial harm identified to the designated heritage asset.

 

IMPACT ON NEIGHBOUR AMENITY

 

5.23  The NPPF states that developments should create places with a high standard of amenity for all existing and future users. It goes on to state that decisions should avoid noise from giving rise to significant adverse impacts on health and quality of life as a result of new development. Policies D1 and ENV2 of the 2018 Draft Plan consider amenity.

 

5.24 The buildings sits within a car park area surrounded by buildings in a mix of uses. To the north sit a range of outbuildings associated with The Whippet Inn; to the east is Mill House, a building in office use; to the west are buildings on George Hudson Street with commercial uses at ground floor and student accommodation above; and to the south is another hotel. The new building is approximately 18m from the rear of the properties on George Hudson Street, which, as student accommodation, would be the most sensitive to any loss of residential amenity. Given that windows on these existing properties face east, the new hotel would not result in any significant overshadowing. Given the distances involved and existing outlook from the student accommodation it is not considered that the proposals will result in any significant loss of amenity to those residents. Distances between the hotel on Micklegate and the proposal are similar. Windows on the existing hotel are north facing and so would not be overshadowed by the proposal and, given the hotel use, impacts on amenity would not be significant. Similarly, the offices at Mill House would not be significantly impacted by the proposal given their commercial use. The main bulk of the new building is 20m from Mill House. While elements of Mill House are closer, these do not directly look on to the new hotel and will be less impacted.

 

5.25 No restaurant or bar is proposed within the new hotel and therefore it is considered unlikely that the proposal will result in significant noise or odour disturbance to neighbouring residents. In this busy city centre location the comings and goings of visitors to the site will not be unduly disruptive to neighbouring occupiers, both residential and commercial.

 

5.26 Concerns were raised by the North Yorkshire Designing Out Crime Officer (DOCO) in regards to how crime prevention measures are incorporated into the scheme. In particular there was concern that there was little activity of natural surveillance in the courtyard area which would make it feel unwelcoming particularly at night. Following a meeting between the architect and DOCO a number of measures have been agreed. External lighting will be designed to ensure all areas of the site used by staff and visitors are well lit, the site will be staffed 24/7 and self check-in desks will be supported by a receptionist to provide the oversight and capable guardianship required by the DOCO report. It has been agreed between the parties that a suitably worded condition would be acceptable now to address these issues. Policy D1 of the emerging Local Plan requires that proposals are designed to reduce crime and the fear of crime, and to promote public safety throughout the day and night. It is acknowledged that this backland courtyard currently has issues with crime however this development has the potential to address these by increasing activity and natural surveillance in accordance with policy D1.

 

HIGHWAYS AND PARKING

 

5.27  Paragraph 110 of the NPPF states that when assessing applications for development, it should be ensured that:

 

-   appropriate opportunities to promote sustainable transport modes can be – or have been – taken up, given the type of development and its location

-   safe and suitable access to the site can be achieved for all users; and

-   any significant impacts from the development on the transport network (in terms of capacity and congestion), or on highway safety, can be cost effectively mitigated to an acceptable degree.

 

5.28  Para 111 goes onto say development should only be prevented or refused on highways grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety, or the residual cumulative impacts on the road network would be severe.

 

5.29  Policy T1 of the 2018 Draft Plan states that to provide safe, suitable and attractive access, proposals will be required to demonstrate there is safe and appropriate access to the adjacent adopted highway. Proposals should also create safe and secure layouts for motorised vehicles (including public transport vehicles), cyclists, pedestrians that minimise conflict.

 

5.30  The application site lies within the city centre and is approximately 1km walking distance from York railway station. There are also a number of bus stops within walking distance on Rougier Street, Micklegate and at the station. No car parking is provided although there are public pay car parks nearby on Tanner Row and Esplanade. Cycle parking is to be provided internally for guests/staff in accordance with Council guidance requirements.

 

5.31  The proposal is a car free development which, with adequate cycle parking, is acceptable in this location and, subject to conditions, complies with paragraphs 110-111 of the NPPF and Policy T1 of the 2018 Draft Plan.

 

DRAINAGE AND FLOOD RISK

 

5.32 The site lies within Flood Zone 2 with the access off North Street lying within Flood Zone 3.

 

5.33 Policy ENV4 of the 2018 Draft Plan is in accordance with Paragraph 167 of the NPPF which states that when determining applications the LPA should only consider development appropriate in areas at risk of flooding where, informed by a site-specific flood risk assessment following the Sequential Test, and the Exception Test, it can be demonstrated that:

 

-   within the site, the most vulnerable development is located in areas of lowest flood risk unless there are overriding reasons to prefer a different location;

-   and development is appropriately flood resilient and resistant;

-   it incorporates sustainable drainage systems, unless there is clear evidence that this would be inappropriate;

-   any residual risk can be safely managed;

-   and safe access and escape routes are included where appropriate, as part of an agreed emergency plan.

 

SEQUENTIAL TEST

 

5.34 The LPA needs to be satisfied in all cases that the proposed development would be safe and not lead to increased flood risk elsewhere. The aim of the sequential test is to steer new development to areas at the lowest probability of flooding (Zone 1). The National Planning Policy Guidance (‘NPPG’) states that when applying the Sequential Test, a pragmatic approach on the availability of alternatives should be taken: "the area to apply the Sequential Test across will be defined by local circumstances relating to the catchment area for the type of development proposed. For some developments this may be clear, for example, the catchment area for a school. In other cases it may be identified from other Local Plan policies, such as the need for affordable housing within a town centre, or a specific area identified for regeneration. For example, where there are large areas in Flood Zones 2 and 3 (medium to high probability of flooding) and development is needed in those areas to sustain the existing community, sites outside them are unlikely to provide reasonable alternatives".

 

5.35 The supporting information sets out comparable sites would need to be small in size (the site is 0.116Ha), within a commercial area as appropriate for the intended use and within Flood Zone 1 or 2. A search of the CYC Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment, estate agents and emerging Local Plan allocations has been made which resulted in size sites which were considered in detail. Further analysis indicated that these sites are either not reasonably available, or suitable alternatives located in lower risk flood zones and the proposal therefore passes the sequential test. As the vulnerability classification of the development is more vulnerable, and the site sits within Flood Zone 2, an exception test is not required.

 

5.36 The site benefits from the presence of recently upgraded flood defences at North Street Gardens. An effective evacuation plan is appropriate in this location due to the low residual flood risks, the presence of formal flood defence infrastructure and a mature flood warning service. Emergency access and egress is to be provided from the rear of the building through the car park and on to Micklegate via the passageway to the side of the Travelodge. While this route is not in the ownership of the applicant, they have confirmed that they have right of access.

 

5.37 Whilst the site is clearly in Flood Zone 2 the residual risk is relatively low - the NPPF guidance recognises that an understanding of residual risk is important behind flood defence infrastructure and it is considered that the applicant has addressed this in their approach.

 

5.38 The Environment Agency does not have an objection to the application, subject to the mitigation set out it in the FRA taking place, part of this mitigation includes a Flood Evacuation Plan being in place. In view of the above it is considered that the proposed development passes the exception test. There is adequate evidence that the sequential and exception tests can be passed. The measures within the FRA and the Flood Evacuation Plan would be secured through a planning condition.

 

5.39 Yorkshire Water have confirmed that the revised drainage strategy is acceptable to them and have recommended a condition. This strategy identifies that sub-soil conditions do not support the use of soakaways and that surface water will therefore discharge to a public combined sewer at a restricted rate.

 

5.40 Comments from the Council’s Flood Risk Management engineer to be updated at committee.

 

SUSTAINABILITY

 

5.41  In terms of general sustainability, the site is in a very sustainable city centre location and is proposed as a car free development. Policy CC1 and CC2 of the 2018 Draft Plan require that new buildings must achieve a reasonable reduction in carbon emissions of at least 28% unless it can be demonstrated that this is not viable and non-residential buildings meet BREEAM excellent. The applicant intends that the new hotel delivers exemplar sustainability and energy performance including net zero carbon. The proposal includes PV panels incorporated into the saw tooth roof form and air source heat pumps. Details will be secured via condition.

 

5.42 The site is brownfield land having been previously occupied by an industrial building. Policy SS1 of the emerging Local Plan encourages that use of previously developed land where it is viable and deliverable. The NPPF encourages the effective use of land in urban areas and it is recognised that the site is in a highly sustainable location in the city centre.

 

6.0 CONCLUSION

 

6.1    The proposed redevelopment of the application site for a hotel is considered to be acceptable in principle given the city centre use. The proposal is acknowledged to be in highly sensitive location with a number of designated heritage assets in close proximity, and also being within the conservation area. The proposal, as a result of its design and scale, preserves the character and appearance of the conservation area and the setting of the listed buildings. Furthermore, the scheme provides a sustainable car free development and will help to meet the Council’s ambitious climate change targets set out in Policies CC1 and CC2 of the 2018 Draft Plan. The proposal is considered to be a distinctive and positive design solution for the location and acceptable on amenity grounds.

 

6.2    Paragraph 11(d) of the NPPF states where there are no relevant development plan policies, planning permission should be granted unless the application of policies in the NPPF that protect areas or assets of particular importance provides a clear reason for refusing the development proposed or any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the NPPF taken as a whole. This assessment has concluded that, while the proposal will result in less than substantial harm to below ground heritage. Paragraph 202 of the NPPF requires that where a proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal. In this instance it is considered that the less than substantial harm is outweighed by economic and regeneration benefits. The proposed conditions would ensure acceptable mitigation.

 

7.0  RECOMMENDATION:   Approve

 

 

1       TIME2       Development start within three years

 

 2      The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following plans and other submitted details:-

Location plan

Flood Risk Assessment Rev D

Flood evacuation plan Rev A

Level 00 floor plan 17070-VB-ZZ-00-DR-A-(03)10 P08

Level 01 floor plan  17070-VB-ZZ-01-DR-A-(03)11 - P06 

Level 02-04 floor plan  17070-VB-ZZ-02-DR-A-(03)12 - P06  

Level 05 floor plan  17070-VB-ZZ-05-DR-A-(03)15 - P02 

Level 06 floor plan  17070-VB-ZZ-07-DR-A-(03)16 - P04 

Roof plan 17070-VB-ZZ-XX-DR-A-(03)19 - P04

East elevation  17070-VB-ZZ-XX-DR-A-(03)30C - P03

North elevation   17070-VB-ZZ-XX-DR-A-(03)31C - P03

West elevation 17070-VB-ZZ-XX-DR-A-(03)33C - P03

South elevation  17070-VB-ZZ-XX-DR-A-(03)32C - P04 

 

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure that the development is carried out only as approved by the Local Planning Authority.

 

 3      No development shall take place until a detailed scheme of noise insulation measures for protecting the approved hotel accommodation from externally generated noise has been submitted to and approved in

writing by the Local Planning Authority. Upon completion of the insulation scheme works no part of the development shall be occupied until a noise report demonstrating compliance with the approved noise

insulation scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

 

INFORMATIVE: The building envelope of all hotel accommodation shall be constructed so as to achieve internal noise levels in habitable rooms of no greater than 35 dB LAeq (16 hour) during the day (07:00-23:00 hrs) and 30 dB LAeq (8 hour) and LAFMax level during the night (23:00-07:00 hours) should not exceed 45dB(A) on more than 10 occasions in any night time period in bedrooms and should not regularly exceed 55dB(A). These noise levels shall be observed with all windows open in the habitable rooms or if necessary windows closed and other means of ventilation provided.

 

Reason: To protect the amenity of people living in the new property from externally generated noise and in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

 

 4      Details of all machinery, plant and equipment to be installed in or located on the premises, which is audible outside of the premises, shall be submitted to the local planning authority for approval. These details shall include average sound levels (LAeq), octave band noise levels and any proposed noise mitigation measures. The machinery, plant or equipment and any approved noise mitigation measures shall be fully implemented and operational before the proposed use first opens and shall be appropriately maintained thereafter.

 

Note: The combined rating level of any building service noise associated with plant or equipment at the site should not exceed 46dB(A) LA90 1 hour during the hours of 07:00 to 23:00 or 38dB(A) 15 minutes during the hours of 23:00 to 07:00 at 1 metre from the nearest noise sensitive facades when assessed in accordance with BS4142: 2014, inclusive of any acoustic feature corrections associated with tonal, impulsive, distinctive or intermittent characteristics.

 

Reason: To protect the amenity of nearby properties and the environmental qualities of the area.

 

5       All demolition and construction works and ancillary operations, including deliveries to and dispatch from the site shall be confined to the following hours:

 

Monday to Friday 0800 to 1800 hours

Saturday 0900 to 1300 hours

Not at all on Sundays and Bank Holidays

 

Reason: To protect the amenity of the locality.

 

6       Prior to the first occupation of the hotel hereby approved, a Designing Out Crime statement detailing how the safety of staff and guests at the hotel will be addressed in both the communal spaces of the hotel, and external to the building, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The approved statement shall be fully implemented prior to first occupation and for the lifetime of the development.

 

Reason: In the interests of safety and in accordance with paragraphs 92 and 130 of the NPPF.

 

 7      Before the occupation of the development, the specification of the 12 Electric Vehicle Recharging Point(s) proposed shall be approved in writing by the Council. The applicant shall also submit to the Council for approval in writing  an 'Electric Vehicle Recharging Point Management Plan' that will detail the management, maintenance, servicing and access/charging arrangements for each Electric Vehicle Recharging Point for a minimum period of 10 years.

 

Reason: To promote and facilitate the uptake of electric vehicles on the site in line with the Council's Low Emission Strategy (LES) and the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

 

Notes

Electric Vehicle Charging Points should incorporate a suitably rated 32A (minimum) 'IEC 62196' electrical socket to allow 'Mode 3' charging of an electric vehicle. The exact specification is subject to agreement in writing with the council.

 

A written commitment to service and maintain the charge points in line with the manufacturers guidelines, for a minimum period of 10 years, should be provided by the applicant as part of the 'Electric Vehicle Recharging Point Management Plan'

 

All electrical circuits/installations shall comply with the electrical requirements in force at the time of installation.

 

8       Prior to development, an investigation and risk assessment (in addition to any assessment provided with the planning application) shall be undertaken to assess the nature and extent of any land contamination. The investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken by competent persons.  A written report of the findings shall be produced, submitted to and approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The report of the findings must include:

 

(i)      a survey of the extent, scale and nature of contamination (including ground gases where appropriate);

(ii)      an assessment of the potential risks to:

          - human health,

          - property (existing or proposed) including buildings, crops, livestock, pets, woodland and service lines and pipes,

          - adjoining land,

          - groundwaters and surface waters,

          - ecological systems,

           - archaeological sites and ancient monuments;

(iii)     an appraisal of remedial options, and proposal of the preferred option(s).

           

This shall be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency's 'Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR 11'.

 

Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors.

 

9       Prior to development, a detailed remediation scheme to bring the site to a condition suitable for the intended use (by removing unacceptable risks to human health, buildings and other property and the natural and historical environment) shall be submitted to and approved in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include all works to be undertaken, proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria, timetable of works and site management procedures. The scheme shall ensure that the site will not qualify as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 in relation to the intended use of the land after remediation.

 

Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors.

 

10     Prior to first occupation or use, the approved remediation scheme shall be carried out in accordance with its terms and a verification report that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation carried out must be produced and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.

 

Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems.

 

11     In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development that was not previously identified, it must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority. An investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken and where remediation is necessary a remediation scheme must be prepared, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a verification report must be prepared, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.

 

Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors.

 

12     The development hereby permitted shall achieve a reduction in carbon emissions of at least 28% compared to the target emission rate as required under Part L of the Building Regulations 2013, or shall demonstrate that the building is being constructed under the requirements of the 2021 edition of the Regulations.

 

Prior to above ground construction, details of the measures undertaken to secure compliance with this condition shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

 

Reason: To fulfil the environmental objectives of the NPPF and support the transition to a low carbon future, and in accordance with policies CC1 and CC2 of the Publication Draft Local Plan 2018.

 

13     The development hereby permitted shall achieve a BREEAM rating of at least excellent. 

 

A Post Construction Assessment by a licensed BREEAM assessor shall be carried out and a copy of the certificate submitted to the Local Planning Authority within 12 months of first use (unless otherwise agreed).  Should the development fail to achieve a 'Excellent' BREEAM rating a report shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority demonstrating what remedial measures shall be undertaken to achieve a 'Excellent' rating. The remedial measures shall then be undertaken within a timescale to be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.'

 

Reason: To fulfil the environmental objectives of the NPPF and support the transition to a low carbon future, and in accordance with policies CC1 and CC2 of the Publication Draft Local Plan 2018.

 

14     Prior to the commencement of above ground works details of the proposed green walls shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details shall include, but not be limited to, construction and irrigation system, planting and a maintenance plan. The green wall shall be finished and maintained in accordance with the approved details.

 

Reason: To safeguard the character and visual amenity of the development and the public realm.

 

15     Notwithstanding any proposed materials specified on the approved drawings or in the application form submitted with the application, samples of the external materials to be used shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the construction of the development above ground level.  The development shall be carried out using the approved materials.

 

Note: Because of limited storage space at our offices it would be appreciated if sample materials could be made available for inspection at the site. Please make it clear in your approval of details application when the materials will be available for inspection and where they are located.

 

Reason:  So as to achieve a visually cohesive appearance.

 

16     A sample panel of the brickwork to be used on this building shall be erected on the site and shall illustrate the colour, texture and bonding of brickwork and the mortar treatment to be used, and shall be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of building works.  This panel shall be retained until a minimum of 2 square metres of wall of the approved development has been completed in accordance with the approved sample.

 

Reason:  So that the Local Planning Authority may be satisfied with the finished appearance of these details prior to the commencement of building works in view of their sensitive location.

 

17     The building shall not be occupied until the areas shown on the approved plans for parking and manoeuvring of vehicles (and cycles, if shown) have been constructed and laid out in accordance with the approved plans, and thereafter such areas shall be retained solely for such purposes.

 

Reason:  In the interests of highway safety.

 

18     No works shall take place until a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The CTMP shall include but not be limited to the following information:

 

- measures to prevent the egress of mud and other detritus onto the adjacent public highway;

- a dilapidation survey jointly undertaken with the local highway authority;

- the routing for construction traffic that will be promoted;

- a scheme for signing the promoted construction traffic routing; and

- contact details for the main contractor.

 

Reason: To ensure that the development can be carried out in a manner that will not be to the detriment of amenity of local residents or the safe and free passage of highway users

 

19     No part of the development shall be occupied until a Travel Plan, based on the Hotel Travel Plan, 29 May 2020, Version 1.1, has been submitted and approved in writing by the LPA. The Travel Plan should be developed and implemented in line with local and national guidelines. The site shall thereafter be occupied in accordance with the aims, measures and outcomes of said Travel Plan.

 

Within 12 months of occupation of the site a first year travel survey shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. Results of yearly annual travel surveys carried out over period of 4 years from the first survey shall then be submitted annually to the authority's travel plan officer for approval.

 

Reason: To ensure that traffic flows from the site can be safely accommodated and to promote the usage of sustainable means of transport.

 

20     The archaeological scheme comprises 4 stages of work. Each stage shall be completed and agreed by the Local Planning Authority before it can be approved.

 

A) No intrusive investigation or development shall commence until an Archaeological Remains Management Plan (ARMP) has been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing. For land that is included within the ARMP, no intrusive investigation or development shall take place other than in accordance with the agreed ARMP.

 

B) All groundworks shall be completed in accordance with the programme set out in the ARMP approved under (A). The ARMP will be updated when necessary.

 

C) The site investigation and post-investigation assessment shall be completed in accordance with the programme set out in the approved ARMP and the provision made for analysis, community engagement, 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 ARMP.

 

D) A copy of a report shall be deposited with City of York Historic Environment Record to allow public dissemination of results within 6 months of completion or such other period as may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

 

This condition is imposed in accordance with Section 16 of NPPF.

 

Reason: The site lies within an Area of Archaeological Importance and the development will affect important archaeological deposits which must be preserved in-situ and, where agreed recorded prior to destruction.

 

21     No construction shall commence until a foundation design and statement of working methods for identifying and dealing with obstructions to piles has been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The design must not cut off waterlogged deposits from the river. No intrusions other than pile caps, lift pit and piles themselves will be permitted below 8.75m AOD. The foundation design will preserve at least 95% of the most significant archaeological deposits below the level of 8.75m AOD.

 

This condition is imposed in accordance with Section 16 of NPPF and City of York Historic Environment Policy D6.

 

Reason: The site lies within an Area of Archaeological Importance which contains significant archaeological deposits. The foundation for the new build must be designed to preserve at least 95% of the most significant archaeological deposits.

 

22     Wet, organic-rich archaeological deposits survive on and around this site. An archaeological programme of hydrological and water quality monitoring is required to assess the impact on preservation of organic deposits. The archaeological programme comprises 2 stages of work. Each stage shall be completed and agreed by the Local Planning Authority before it can be approved.

 

A) Installation of hydrological and water quality monitoring devices shall be completed in accordance with the programme set out in Archaeological Remains Management Plan.

 

B) Evidence of provision for regular monitoring of, analysis and reporting on data from the hydrological and water quality monitoring devices during excavation (if required), and for a maximum period of 5 years following construction shall be submitted. The evidence must show how costs will be covered and set-out procedure for submitting annual interim reports, a final analysis report and raw data to the City Archaeologist for inclusion within the Historic Environment Record.

 

This condition is imposed in accordance with Section 16 of NPPF and the latest guidance from Historic England on in-situ preservation of organic deposits and subsequent monitoring.

 

Reason: The site lies within an Area of Archaeological Importance which contains nationally significant non-designated heritage asset (waterlogged organic archaeological deposits) which will be affected by development.

 

23     The buildings shall not be brought into use until evidence for the provision of a report, regarding the archaeological findings, in the form of a suitable publication in an agreed journal/outlet has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

 

Reason: The publication of the results of the archaeological work will allow further dissemination of information to the wider public of the work undertaken. This is in accordance with Section 16 of the NPPF.

 

24     Prior to the first use of the hotel details of any external lighting shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This scheme shall detail the locations, heights, angle, design and lux of all external lighting. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved lighting scheme.

 

Any subsequent revisions or alterations to the lighting scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved lighting scheme.

 

Reason: To prevent crime, or the fear of crime, and protect neighbouring amenity.

 

25     Prior to the commencement of above ground development, 1:20 drawings in plan and elevation for any external plant room enclosures shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority (LPA) and the works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.  This shall include a maximum height of any plant equipment within the enclosure.

 

Note:

 

For flat roofs, in situations without a solid roof parapet (1m or higher, as shown on permitted drawings), service protrusions are not allowed within 2m of any building edge. Any service protrusions lower than 1m above roof finish level elsewhere are allowed. Any proposals for service protrusions higher than 1m above flat roof level elsewhere are to be submitted to, and approved by, the LPA, but should generally be expected not to be permitted.

 

For flat roofs in situations with a solid roof parapet (1m or higher, as shown on permitted drawings): service penetrations should not be higher than top of parapet. Any such proposals above parapet level are to be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the LPA.

 

Permanent external wall fixed equipment used to service the building are not permissible, unless subsequently agreed by the Local Planning Authority through the submission of drawings.

 

Reason: In the interests of good design and in accordance with NPPF paragraph 127.

 

26     The site shall be developed with separate systems of drainage for foul and surface water on and off site.

 

Reason: In the interests of satisfactory and sustainable drainage.

 

27     No development shall take place until details of the proposed means of surface water drainage, including details of any balancing works and off site works, have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

 

Design considerations.

 

The developer's attention is drawn to Requirement H3 of the Building Regulations 2000 with regards to hierarchy for surface water dispersal and the use of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuD's). Consideration should be given to discharge to soakaway, infiltration system and watercourse in that priority order. Surface water discharge to the existing public sewer network must only be as a last resort therefore sufficient evidence should be provided i.e. witnessed by CYC infiltration tests to BRE Digest 365 to discount the use of SuD's.

 

If the proposed method of surface water disposal is via soakaways, these should be shown to work through an appropriate assessment carried out under BRE Digest 365, (preferably carried out in winter), to prove that the ground has sufficient capacity to except surface water discharge, and to prevent flooding of the surrounding land and the site itself.

 

City of York Council's Flood Risk Management Team should witness the BRE Digest 365 test.

 

If SuDs methods can be proven to be unsuitable then In accordance with City of York Councils City of York Councils Sustainable Drainage Systems Guidance for Developers (August 2018) and in agreement with the Environment Agency and the York Consortium of Internal Drainage Boards, peak run-off from Brownfield developments must be attenuated to 70% of the existing rate (based on 140 l/s/ha of proven by way of CCTV drainage survey connected impermeable areas). Storage volume calculations, using computer modelling, must accommodate a 1:30 year storm with no surface flooding, along with no internal flooding of buildings or surface run-off from the site in a 1:100 year storm.  Proposed areas within the model must also include an additional 30% allowance for climate change. The modelling must use a range of storm durations, with both summer and winter profiles, to find the worst-case volume required.

 

If existing connected impermeable areas not proven then Greenfield sites are to limit the discharge rate to the pre developed run off rate. The pre development run off rate should be calculated using either IOH 124 or FEH methods (depending on catchment size).

 

In some instances design flows from minor developments may be so small that the restriction of flows may be difficult to achieve. However, through careful selection of source control or SuDS techniques it should be possible to manage or restrict flows from the site to a minimum 0.5 l/sec for individual residential properties, please discuss any design issues with the City of York Council Flood Risk Management Team.

 

Where calculated runoff rates are not available the widely used 1.4l/s/ha rate can be used as a proxy, however, if the developer can demonstrate that the existing site discharges more than 1.4l/s/ha a higher existing runoff rate may be agreed and used as the discharge limit for the proposed development. If discharge to public sewer is required, and all alternatives have been discounted, the receiving public sewer may not have adequate capacity and it is recommend discussing discharge rate with Yorkshire Water Services Ltd at an early stage.

 

Surface water shall not be connected to any foul / combined sewer, if a suitable surface water sewer is available.

 

The applicant should provide a topographical survey showing the existing and proposed ground and finished floor levels to ordnance datum for the site and adjacent properties. The development should not be raised above the level of the adjacent land, to prevent runoff from the site affecting nearby properties.

Details of the future management and maintenance of the proposed drainage scheme shall be provided.

 

Reason:  So that the Local Planning Authority may be satisfied with these details for the proper and sustainable drainage of the site.

 

28     Unless otherwise approved in writing by the local planning authority, there shall be no piped discharge of surface water from the development prior to the completion of the approved surface water drainage works and no buildings shall be occupied or brought into use prior to completion of the approved foul drainage works.

 

Reason:  So that the Local Planning Authority may be satisfied that no foul and surface water discharges take place until proper provision has been made for their disposal.

 

8.0  INFORMATIVES:

Notes to Applicant

 

1. STATEMENT OF THE COUNCIL`S POSITIVE AND PROACTIVE APPROACH

 

In considering the application, the Local Planning Authority has implemented the requirements set out within the National Planning Policy Framework (paragraph 38) in seeking solutions to problems identified during the processing of the application.  The Local Planning Authority took the following steps in order to achieve a positive outcome:

 

Requested changes to address issues regarding the impact on the Conservation Area.

 

2. You are advised that prior to starting on site, consent will be required from the Highways Authority for the works being proposed under the Highways Act 1980 (or legislation/ regulations listed below). For further information, please contact the section(s) named:

 

Agreements as to execution of works (Section 278) - development.adoption@york.gov.uk

Works in the highway (Section 171) - streetworks@york.gov.uk

 

3. INFORMATIVE: 

You are advised that this proposal may have an effect on Statutory Undertakers equipment.  You must contact all the utilities to ascertain the location of the equipment and any requirements they might have prior to works commencing.

 

Contact details:

Case Officer:     Alison Stockdale

Tel No:                01904 555730