Agenda and minutes

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

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

Councillor D’Agorne declared a personal non-prejudicial interest as a Council nominee on the York Environment Forum.

Councillor Merrett declared a personal non-prejudicial interest as a Council nominee on the York Environment Forum and as Cycling Champion.

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting of the Local Development Framework Working Group held on 10 January 2011.

At the last meeting, letters had been circulated from Atkins Ltd and Colliers International disputing the designation of the British Sugar Site and the Severus Hill Water Reservoir as Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC). On 8^th February 2011 the SINC panel met to re-consider the SINC designations and subsequently the sites had been re-confirmed as SINC.

RESOLVED: (i)         That the minutes of the meeting of the Local Development Framework Working Group held on 10^th January 2011 be approved and signed by the Chair as a correct record.

(ii)               That it be recommended to the Executive that the two sites be added to the list attached at Appendix 1 of the Biodiversity report as considered at the meeting on 10^th January.

REASON:                  So that the sites identified as SINCs can be used in

considering allocations made within the LDF and on any planning applications that may impact upon them.

At this point in the meeting, members of the public who have registered their wish to speak, regarding an item on the agenda or an issue within the remit of the Working Group, may do so.  The deadline for registering is 5.00 pm on Friday 11^th February 2011.

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

The purpose of this report is to allow Members to consider the draft Core Strategy Submission document attached as Annex A and associated legal and soundness issues.

The report annexes are provided to Members of the LDF Working Group and are available online via the Council’s website, from the report author and in the Members Library.

 Members considered a report which outlined the draft Core Strategy Submission document and the associated legal and soundness issues.

The Core Strategy is a written statement of the planning strategy and vision for the City of York, together with strategic policies. All other planning documents produced must fit in with the Core Strategy. At previous working group meetings, Members made key recommendations relating to the Spatial Strategy element of the Core Strategy. The Executive endorsed the recommendations in December 2010 and these are reflected in the Core Strategy document attached at annex a. Officers advised that Annex D, the Heritage topic paper is a new document which takes into account the issues that need to be considered in relation to York’s heritage.

Officers requested that Members provide them with recommendations for any changes to the draft document, as well as any editorial and formatting changes. This could also be done after the meeting via email, but being mindful that the report is due at the Executive on March 1^st.

The Chair suggested that Members worked through the document section by section and discussions were had on general points throughout the meeting. The following issues were identified as main changes as follows:

Officer Report

Certain Members voiced their disappointment in the report, in particular that it did not reflect that the LDF Working Group had not wanted to follow the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS).

Core Strategy Submission Draft

Section 1 Background.

• 1.22 - Officers need to check eco-footprint figures as they have reduced since 2006, all sections need to be checked to ensure the figures all match throughout the document.
• 1.23 – strengthen reference to legal requirements, particularly the sentence that refers to ‘exceed acceptable levels of air quality’ to reflect that we are already exceeding legal limits set by European legislation.
• 1.28 – Certain members queried the average earning figure for York residents as £31k seemed high and suggested that the mean, mode and median figures be checked and included.

Section 2 Vision.

• Officers to check that EU legislation on air quality is not being breached and amend as appropriate. Members agreed that it would be better to change the background section rather than the Vision.

Section 4 The Role of York’s Green Belt.

• Officers to make it clearer that York has specific characteristics relating to the Green Belt and settlements around the City.

Section 5 York City Centre.

• Discussions were had concerning the Council’s policy to provide a City Centre swimming pool.  Certain Members felt that reference to a site being required should be made in the Core Strategy.  Officers agreed to formulate some general wording without being site specific to reflect that in future a decision would need to be taken on the location of a City Centre swimming pool.
• Policy CS2, item 3, para v – some Members queried the levels of development opportunities available in this area, although others felt there were opportunities were available and therefore this should remain as an area of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 36.