Agenda and draft minutes
Venue: The George Hudson Board Room - 1st Floor West Offices (F045). View directions
Contact: Angela Bielby Democracy Officer
Declarations of Interest
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. In respect of agenda items 4b [Oak Haven, 144 Acomb Road, York, YO24 4HA [22/00304/FULM] and 4c [York Wheelchair Centre, Bluebeck House, Bluebeck Drive, York YO30 5RA [22/00707/FULM], Cllr Rowley noted his profession as a Funeral Director. There were no further declarations of interest.
To approve and sign the minutes of the meetings of the Planning Committee A held on 7 July and 11 July 2022.
i. That the minutes of the meeting of Planning Committee A held on 7 July 2022 be approved and then signed by the Chair as a correct record.
ii. That the minutes of the meeting held on 11 July 2022 be approved and then signed by the Chair as a correct record subject amending Cllr Daubeney substituting for Cllr Waudby, and the second sentence of the second paragraph under Declarations of Interest being amended to ‘Cllr D’Agorne noted that Lars Kramm, a registered speaker for the planning application was previously on the Green Group.’
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 2 August 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 one registration to speak at the meeting under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme on general matters within the remit of the Planning Committee A. Johnny Hayes explained that when CYC developed its own projects there had been serious public concern about how these were handled in the planning process. He added that the ombudsman had expressed concern regarding planning. He noted his concerns regarding a number of aspects in the determination of planning applications. In respect of the National Railway Museum central hall application on being considered at the meeting, he noted that flaws in the planning system that were behind the public outrage to the application.
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.
The Chair explained that agenda items 4b Oak Haven, 144 Acomb Road, York, YO24 4HA (22/00304/FULM) and 4c York Wheelchair Centre, Bluebeck House, Bluebeck Drive, York YO30 5RA (22/00707/FULM) would be taken ahead of agenda item 4a Railway Museum, Leeman Road, York (21/02793/REMM) due to the number of public speakers registered on that application. Cllr Crawshaw recorded his strong objection to the reordering of the agenda. He explained that he had informed the Chair on Monday that week that he would only be available as substitute for Cllr Melly in order to conclude the business of the previously deferred National Railway Museum item. He stated that due to the reordering of the agenda he would almost certainly now be precluded from taking part in the decision on the NRM application and expressed deep unhappiness at the way this had been handled.
Erection of 64 bedroom residential care home (use class C2) with associated structures, access, parking and landscaping following demolition of existing structures [Holgate Ward]
Members considered a major full application from St Marys (North Yorkshire) Ltd for the erection of 64 bedroom residential care home (use class C2) with associated structures, access, parking and landscaping following demolition of existing structures at Oak Haven, 144 Acomb Road, York.
The Head of Planning and Development Services gave a presentation on the application.
Cllr K Taylor (Ward Member) spoke in support of the application. He noted the disappointment of the Ward Councillors in looking at different options for the site. He noted concern regarding the loss of trees and increase in parking demand.
Tim Ross, Agent for the Applicant, spoke in support of the application. He detailed the increase in demand for care beds and outlined why the location was good for a care home. He noted the high quality of the design and that there were no objections to the application. In response to Member questions, he explained that:
· The two disabled parking spaces and EV charging spaces had been worked through with highways officers.
· Residents would tend to be end of life care and high dependency.
· The repurposing of the building and been looked at and found to be unsuitable for the needs of the people in the care home.
· The private garden on the frontage was a key part of the design and there would be a visitor café area.
· All residents on the ground floor would have access to the outdoor space.
· The bedrooms would be to rent.
· The room sizes were in excess of CQC room sizes were comparable to other care home rooms offered around the city.
· The types of trees and planting.
Following debate, Cllr Fenton moved the officer recommendation to approve the application. This was seconded by Cllr Looker and following a unanimous vote in favour it was;
Resolved: That the application be approved.
Reason: Oak Haven comprises a disused brick built care home dating to the late 1960s with a substantial frontage on to York Road to the north east of the Acomb District Centre. Planning permission is sought for the erection of a three storey brick built 64 bedroom care home with a pitched roof following on from the demolition of the existing structures on site. The existing built footprint would be broadly followed in terms of the new construction. It is felt that the proposal would provide much needed specialist elderly residential care to part remedy existing deficiencies. It would provide a sensitive design solution for a visually sensitive location in street scene terms. It would make appropriate use of landscaping both for the amenity of residents and the amenity of the wider area and it seeks to minimise parking off site in the surrounding area. The proposal is therefore felt to comply with the policies of the NPPF and the Publication Draft Local Plan 2018.
Erection of 72no. bedroom care home (use class C2) with associated landscaping following demolition of Blue Beck House and outbuildings [Rawcliffe And Clifton Without Ward]
Members considered a major full application from Torsion Care (York) Limited And NHS Property Services Ltd for the erection of 72no. bedroom care home (use class C2) with associated landscaping following demolition of Blue Beck House and outbuildings at York Wheelchair Centre, Bluebeck House, Bluebeck Drive, York.
The Head of Planning and Development Services gave a presentation on the application. The Development Management Officer gave an update advising that there had been additional consultation with the housing strategy team who had no objections. There had also been a revision to condition 2 – plans.
Ian Ward, Agent for the Applicant, spoke in support of the application. He explained that the Applicant, Torsion Care, would develop, build and operate the care home. It would bring jobs to the local economy and would be a fit for future care home. He explained how it would be operated. He noted there was a lack of care beds and the energy efficiency measures of the application. He was asked and explained that it was unlikely that residents would have cars and the spaces provided were for visitors and staff.
Officers were asked and confirmed that there was nothing to stop the operators of the care home saying that residents could not have a room if they had a car. It was also confirmed that the PU panels had come as an offer from the applicant.
During debate Cllr noted a non-prejudicial interest as an employee of the NHS. Cllr Baker proposed the officer recommendation to approve the application with the revision to condition 2 - plans. This was seconded by Cllr Pavlovic and following a unanimous vote it was;
Resolved: That the application be approved subject to the conditions in the report and revised condition 2: Plans
Condition 2: Plans
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following plans and other submitted details: -
Proposed elevations 3165-HIA-01-XX-DR-A-0301 P04, 3165-HIA-01-XX-DR-A-0302 P5 and 3165-HIA-01-XX-DR-A-0303 P3
Proposed floor plans 3165-HIA-01-00-DR-A-0201 P5, 3165-HIA-01-01-DR-A-0211 P5 and 3165-HIA-01-02-DR-A-0221 P5
Proposed roof plan 3165-HIA-01-03-DR-A-2701 P4
Proposed site plan 3165-HIA-ZZ-XX-DR-A-0103-P8
Proposed landscape plan R3-509-03-LA-01C
Proposed boundary treatment plan 3165-HIA-ZZ-XX-DR-A-0107-P2
Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure that the development is carried out only as approved by the Local Planning Authority.
i. Detailed issues related to the design and form of the building, access, landscaping, and biodiversity have been resolved and are considered to comply with relevant policies. In addition, issues of neighbouring residential amenity are considered to be addressed in the design and siting of the building is relation to existing properties. The proposal complies fully with the requirements of policy H9 in relation to older persons accommodation in meeting an identified need, being well designed and in an accessible location by public transport.
ii. The site falls within the general extent of the Green Belt and the scheme is considered to be inappropriate by definition. However, officers consider that the proposed very special circumstances are sufficient to outweigh the ... view the full minutes text for item 18.
Railway Museum, Leeman Road, York [21/02793/REMM] [17:19]
Members considered a major reserved matters application from the Board of Trustees of The Science Museum for the layout, scale, appearance, landscaping and access for the construction of Central Hall (F1 use class) including entrance hall, exhibition space and café with associated access, parking, landscaping and external works following the demolition of the mess room and other structures pursuant to 18/01884/OUTM at the Railway Museum, Leeman Road, York.
The Head of Planning and Development Services reported that the application had been deferred. The Senior Solicitor advised that Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 (Public Sector Equality Duty) provided that the Council in exercising its functions (which includes the functions exercised by the Council as Local Planning Authority), shall have due regard to the need to-
a) eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that is prohibited under the Equality Act;
b) advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it;
c) foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it.
The protected characteristics set out in Section 4 of the Equality Act were: age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation. She advised that having due regard means consciously thinking about the three aims of the PSED (set out above) as part of the process of decision-making. She added that there is no duty to achieve a particular outcome.
The Head of Planning and Development Services gave a presentation on the application. It was confirmed that the applicant had provided information to officers that outlined the accessibility features of the application. This included the details on, car parking, access routes and vertical circulation, the legibility and ease of use, and internal museum route.
Flick Williams spoke in objection to the application. She noted the focus on the Equalities Impact Assessment (EIA) was there to identify and mitigate harm and she expressed concern about the walkway agreement. She did not feel reassured that NRM staff would assist people through the central hall, and she suggested that some people may be retraumatised by having their bags searched. She was also not assured of the improvements to the riverside path, and she expressed concern regarding social isolation of elderly and disabled residents.
In answer to Member questions, Flick Williams explained:
· Her concern for people with multiple impairments and the impact of a lot of people moving in different directions in the central hall.
· People who are non-verbal would find it difficult to move to speak to staff.
· That the EIA did not meet due regard to items b) and c) of the Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 (Public Sector Equality Duty). She also asked where the evidence of consultation was for people with protected characteristics.
· The EIA should have been done at the beginning of the process.
· The application was being treated ... view the full minutes text for item 19.