Local democracy during coronavirus

During coronavirus, we've made some changes to how we're running council meetings. See our coronavirus updates for more information on meetings and decisions.

Agenda and minutes

Venue: The George Hudson Board Room - 1st Floor West Offices (F045)

Items
No. Item

7.

Declarations of Interest (16:33)

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.

Minutes:

Members were asked to declare at this point in the meeting any

disclosable pecuniary interests or other registrable interests that

they might have in the business on the agenda, if they had not

already done so in advance on the Register of Interests. None were declared.

8.

Minutes (16:34) pdf icon PDF 282 KB

To approve and sign the minutes of the last Planning Committee B meeting held on 08 June 2022.

Minutes:

Resolved:  Subject to the checking of the timings of the agenda items, that the minutes of the last meeting held on 8 June 2022 were approved and to signed by the Chair as a correct record at a later date.

 

9.

Public Participation (16:34)

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 our meetings. The deadline for registering at this meeting is 5:00pm on Tuesday, 09 August 2022.


To register to speak please visit

www.york.gov.uk/AttendCouncilMeetings  to fill out an online

registration form. If you have any questions about the registration form or the meeting, please contact the relevant Democracy Officer, on the details at the foot of the agenda.

 

Webcasting of Public Meetings


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

During coronavirus, we have made some changes to how we are

running council meetings. See our coronavirus updates

www.york.gov.uk/COVIDDemocracy  for more information on meetings and decisions.

Minutes:

It was reported that there had been no registrations to speak at the meeting under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme.

10.

Plans List (16:34)

This item invites Members to determine the following planning applications:

Minutes:

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

11.

Land to the east of Middlewood Close, Rufforth [21/02661/FULM] (16:34) pdf icon PDF 464 KB

Erection of 21 dwellings and associated works. [Rural West York]

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Members considered a major full application from Rob Martin for the erection of 21 dwellings and associated works on land to the east of Middlewood Close, Rufforth, York.

 

The Development Management Officers gave a presentation on the application detailing the site plan, aerial photographs, and access roads.

 

[Cllr Douglas arrived at 16:37].

 

The Development Management Officers then gave a verbal update on the application noting that additional objections and comments had been received. They explained the location of the site and the updated recommendation to approve the application subject to:

1.           Referral of the application to the Secretary of State under the requirements of The Town and Country Planning (Consultation) (England) Direction 2021, and should the application not be called in by the Secretary of State then:

2.           Approve the application subject to the planning obligations and conditions set out below; and

3.           The Head of Planning and Development Services to be given delegated authority to finalise the terns and details of the Section 106 obligations and conditions.

 

In response to Member questions, Officers clarified that:

·        There were no traffic calming measures on the site and there was sufficient parking on the site for each dwelling.

·        A condition would require a dilapidation survey.

·        Air source heat pumps were being indicated to be used to meet the requirements of CC1.

·        There was now a requirement (under Building Regulations) for all dwellings with a drive to have EV charging.

·        Regarding local amenities, there was a school adjacent to the site and a village shop with a post office within it.

·        Officers were confident that approval of this application would not lead to a precedent with regard development of this nature within the Green Belt.

·        Housing officers had examined and were satisfied with the mix of housing.

·        Officers explained why members were advised against refusal on prematurity grounds (in respect of NPPF paragraph 49)

 

Public Speakers

Daniel Russell, neighbour to the site, spoke in objection to the

application. He explained that his family lived next door to the site. He noted that the application being in Green Belt land was undisputed and if approved it would set a precedent for development to the east of the site. Regarding his horse riding facility next to the site, he explained that if the development went ahead this would impact the amenity and utility of the land and to move the riding area would cost £100k. When asked whether he had concerns about the construction or development itself he noted that they would be deemed a safety risk. He was also asked if his concerns could be mitigated and explained that there needed to be distance between the development and the horse riding facility.

 

Peter Rollings (Chairman of Rufforth with Knapton Parish Council)

spoke on the application on behalf of the Parish Council. He explained that whilst the Parish Council did not object to the application they had a number of concerns, which included the application setting a precedent by being considered before the adoption of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.

12.

29 Moor Lane [22/00872/FUL] (17:50) pdf icon PDF 188 KB

Single storey side and rear extensions after demolition of existing garage, and loft conversion with hip to gable roof, dormer to rear and 2no. rooflights to front (part retrospective). [Dringhouses and Woodthorpe Ward]

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Members considered a full application from Roy Grant for Single storey side and rear extensions after demolition of existing garage, and loft conversion with hip to gable roof, dormer to rear and 2no. rooflights to front (part retrospective) at 29 Moor Lane, Acomb, York.

 

The Development Management Officer gave a presentation on the application, explaining the scale and layout of the dormer and single storey L shape extension. Members then asked questions to which officers responded that:

With reference to a previous application for a similar development, both applications were both in the Green Belt. The NPPF guidance on inappropriate development in the Green Belt was explained to Members.

The change to the footprint on the site was a bigger L shape and in terms of the Green Belt, they needed to look at the context which was the dense urban character of that section of the Green Belt.

There was no public footpath behind the property.

 

Cllr Douglas proposed the officer recommendation to approve the application. This was seconded by Cllr Looker. On being put to the vote with Members voting unanimously in favour, it was;

 

Resolved: That the application be approved.

 

Reason:     Taking into account relevant Green Belt policy and design guidance approval is recommended. The proposed extensions are not considered to result in a disproportionate addition to the existing dwelling, and would not impact on the openness of the Green Belt.  The extension would have no undue effect on visual amenity and would not have a significant, or undue impact on neighbour amenity. 

 

Feedback
Back to the top of the page