Agenda and draft minutes

At this point in the meeting, Members and co-opted 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. The disclosure must include the nature of the interest.

An interest must also be disclosed in the meeting when it becomes apparent to the member during the meeting.

[Please see attached sheet for further guidance for Members].

Members were asked to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests, or other registerable interests, they might have in respect of business on the agenda, if they have not already done so in advance on the Register of Interests.

During the meeting, Cllr Merrett declared an interest in that he had objected to the Local Plan on behalf of various organisations and would leave the meeting when this subject was discussed.

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting of the Local Plan Working Group held on 6 March 2023.

Resolved:  That the minutes of the last meeting held on 6 March 2023 be approved as a correct record and then signed by the Chair.

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 are set as 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 Friday, 6 September 2024.

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 http://www.york.gov.uk/webcasts.

During coronavirus, we made some changes to how we ran council meetings, including facilitating remote participation by public speakers. See our updates (http://www.york.gov.uk/COVIDDemocracy) for more information on meetings and decisions.

It was reported that there had been two registrations to speak at the meeting under the council’s Public Participation Scheme.

Gwen Swinburn raised concerns regarding the Supplementary Planning Documents particularly with short term lets noting that this was the biggest issue facing housing availability in the city. She also highlighted her concerns with the National Planning Policy Framework and noted that flats and rooms in student blocks should not be counted as homes to enable an honest and realistic accounting of homes built.

Flick Williams raised accessibility concerns across the city and highlighted why City of York Council should further consider a Supplementary Planning Document on accessibility. She rejected paragraph 10 of the report and welcomed a commitment to require M42 and M43 units from housing developers.

This report seeks to update on the existing SPDs agreed for production, recommend the prioritisation for production of further SPDs with an understanding of their likely contents, resources and timescales. It also seeks approval to proceed with an altered list of SPDs and advises on where additional guidance would be beneficial in preference to an SPD.

The report also considers the e-petition received in March 2024 regarding reviewing the thresholds set out in the Controlling the Concentration of Houses in Multiple Occupation SPD (Draft, 2014).

Members considered a report that updated them on the existing Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs) agreed for production and recommended the prioritisation for production of further SPDs with an understanding of their likely contents, resources, and timescales. It also sought approval to proceed with an altered list of SPDs and advised on where additional guidance would be beneficial in preference to an SPD.

The report also considered the ePetition received in March 2024 regarding reviewing the thresholds set out in the Controlling the Concentration of Houses in Multiple Occupation SPD.

The Head of Strategic Planning Policy, the Head of Planning and Development Services, the Principal Strategic Planning Policy Officer and the Interim Director of City Development presented the report and provided an update noting that:

·        Executive had previously agreed to prioritise the production of three SPDs which were Affordable Housing, Climate Change and Green Infrastructure. The Healthy Places and the Gypsy, Traveller, and Travelling Showpeople SPDs had also been identified as high priority.

·        The production of SPDs would help enable policy delivery by effectively supporting the implementation of Local Plan policies, where necessary. The content of SPDs would enable the council to define how applicants can meet the policy requirements in a consistent manner and would be a valuable tool for ensuring policies were applied to decisions on planning applications consistently.

·        SPDs were likely to be beneficial to council services/technical officers who currently provided detailed advice to applicants in relation to how to deliver and achieve policy expectations set out in the Local Plan. In future, the SPD could be signposted and should deal with the key issues that were most consistently asked about leading to efficiency.

·        There were complimentary subject areas which were not covered directly by policy in the Local Plan or did not require an SPD but would benefit from clear guidance to be a material consideration in the planning process. This guidance may sign post to existing information where helpful and in some cases confirm how the council intends to apply policy at a national level.

During a detailed discussion, Members considered the scope of the SPDs highlighted within the report and Annex C and the SPDs compatibility to the council’s core commitments and priorities. In answer to questions raised, officers noted:

·        A specific Accessibility SPD was not required as this would be reflected across all SPDs and was already a key priority area throughout the planning application and building regulations process.

·        Officers would consider the motions approved at Full Council regarding equality for disabled people and access for all and would continue to consult with the York Access Forum to develop checklists for design considerations. This guidance would complement the accessibility content in the Housing SPD, with a greater focus on the design of public realm and non-residential developments.

·        Each SPD production would align to achieve the council’s four core commitments for Equalities and Human Rights, Affordability, Climate Change and Health. Table 1 at paragraph 19 of the report indicated which core commitments each SPD would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

Any other business which the Chair considers urgent under the Local Government Act 1972.

The Chair confirmed that a report on theproposed reforms to the National Planning Policy Framework Consultation had been considered under urgent business due to the imminent deadline of 24 September 2024 to provide the council’s response to the consultation.

The Head of Strategic Planning Policy provided a presentation, attached as an agenda supplement to the published agenda, to the committee that highlighted the consultation process and the policy objectives as well as providing an overview on how the framework would plan for homes, deliver developments, deliver affordable homes and well-designed places, and support infrastructure, transport, green energy and environment planning. The application fees and the public sector equality duty arrangements were also addressed, and it was noted that:

·        Changes to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) were vital to deliver the government’s commitments to achieve economic growth and build 1.5 million new homes.

·        The housing requirement target for City of York Council was 1251 but an additional buffer of 20% could be added if the council did not meet the housing delivery test, which would increase the target to 1501.

·        Brownfield land would be prioritised first for development then greenfield and then green belt. New golden rules for public benefit would also be incorporated alongside further green belt release and would include:

o   at least 50% affordable housing, where viable;

o   necessary improvements to local or national infrastructure;

o   provision of new, or improvements to existing, local green spaces that were accessible to the public.

·        For the purposes of plan-making and decision-making, grey belt was defined as land in the green belt comprising previously developed land and any other parcels and/or areas of green belt land that make a limited contribution to the five green belt purposes.

Members were also informed that the proposals:

·        encouraged a mixture of tenures on development sites, including affordable housing and social rented homes, which was required to be evidenced by local need.

·        included a new element of meeting the needs of looked after children but omitted any standards for accessible homes or changes for other specialist provision, and this had been raised as a concern.

·        removed the word ‘beauty’ from the design policy.

·        encouraged the importance of facilitating new, expanded, or upgraded public service infrastructure when considering proposals for development.

·        requested feedback on providing a greater direction and clarity on the promotion of health.

·        supported a ‘vision-led’ approach to transport planning which focused on the outcomes desired and planning for achieving them.

·        provided increased support for renewable energy schemes, and the restrictions on onshore wind had been removed.

·        provided significant support for energy efficiency and climate change.

·        considered the ability for local authorities to set their own charging schedules and included raising planning application fees to an estimated £528 for a householder application.

During discussion, Members provided feedback for officers to consider in the council’s response to the consultation, which included:

·        Supporting the increased planning application fees.

·        Accelerating the timescales for planning developers to develop sites and the infrastructure required alongside  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.