Agenda and minutes
Venue: The George Hudson Board Room - 1st Floor West Offices (F045). View directions
Contact: Angela Bielby Democracy Officer
Webcast: video recording
Declarations of Interest
At this point in the meeting, Members are asked to declare:
· any personal interests not included on the Register of Interests
· any prejudicial interests or
· any disclosable pecuniary interests
which they may have in respect of business on this agenda.
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. Cllr Pavlovic declared an interest in agenda item 4b [Former Gas Works, Heworth Green, York YO31 7UG [19/00979/OUTM] as he had a previous working relationship with Joe Gardham, who was speaking on the application.
To approve and sign the minutes of the last meeting of the Planning Committee held on 11 February 2020 (to follow).
Resolved: That the minutes of the last meeting held on 11 February 2020 be approved and then signed by the Chair as a correct record.
It is at this point in the meeting that members of the public who have registered their wish to speak can do so. The deadline for registering is by 5:00pm on Wednesday 11 March 2020. Members of the public can speak on specific planning applications or on other agenda items or matters within the remit of the Committee.
To register, please contact the Democracy Officer for the meeting on the details at the foot of this agenda.
Filming or Recording Meetings
Please note that, subject to available resources, this meeting will be filmed and webcast, or recorded, including any registered public speakers who have given their permission. This broadcast can be viewed at http://www.york.gov.uk/webcasts.
Residents are welcome to photograph, film or record Councillors and Officers at all meetings open to the press and public. This includes the use of social media reporting e.g. tweeting. Anyone wishing to film, record or take photos at any public meeting should contact the Democracy Officer (whose contact details are at the foot of this agenda) in advance of the meeting.
The Council’s protocol on Webcasting, Filming & Recording of Meetings ensures that these practices are carried out in a manner both respectful to the conduct of the meeting and all those present. It can be viewed at http://www.york.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/11406/protocol_for_webcasting_filming_and_recording_of_council_meetings_20160809.pdf
It was reported that there had been no registrations to speak at the meeting under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme on general matters within the remit of the Planning Committee.
This item invites Members to determine the following planning applications:
Members considered a schedule of reports of the Assistant Director, Planning and Public Protection, relating to the following planning applications, outlining the proposals and relevant policy considerations and setting out the views of consultees and officers.
Flood alleviation works comprising of the replacement and extension of the existing flood/retaining wall located within the south-west corner of St Olave's School playing field [Clifton Ward]
Officers demonstrated the layout of the applications using plans and photographs. In answer to a Member question they confirmed that there was a condition regarding operating hours on the site.
David Morrey (Environment Agency) spoke in support of the application on behalf of the applicant. He explained the context of the application and that the works were for a flood cell which was part of 19 flood cells. He explained that the application had come to committee as the wall encroached onto the Green Belt. He advised that approval of the application would allow the completion of flood defences with minimal impact.
Resolved: That the application be approved, subject to the conditions listed in the report.
i. The application site is located within the general extent of the York Green Belt and serves a number of Green Belt purposes. As such it falls to be considered under paragraph 143 of the NPPF which states that inappropriate development, is by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances. Very special circumstances will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness and any other harm are clearly outweighed by other considerations. National planning policy dictates that substantial weight should be given to any harm to the Green Belt.
ii. National planning policy (para. 145) states that the construction of new building in the Green Belt should be regarded as inappropriate unless it falls within one of the exceptions to this outlined in paragraph 145 b of the NPPF. The proposal has been assessed to represent engineering operations as outlined in paragraph 146 (b) of the NPPF however, the development is inappropriate development because, for the reasons outlined above in this report, it fails to preserve the openness of the Green Belt and conflicts withthe purposes of including land within the Green Belt, namely parts C and D of policy 134 of the NPPF (assisting in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment and preserving the setting and special character of historic towns), contrary to paragraph 145b of the NPPF.
iii. The proposal, providing flood defence assets, cannot be located in land at lower risk of flooding as the level of protection would not be achieved. A sequential and exception test has been applied, and as the development is assessed as ‘Water Compatible’, this is appropriate development within any of the Flood Zones.
iv. The application will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance on archaeological features and deposits which are situated within the Central Area of Archaeological Importance. Public benefits are considered to justify this harm. There are limited impacts in respect to landscape setting, ecology and any impacts can be mitigated by condition.
v. This area has ... view the full minutes text for item 46a
Outline application with all matters reserved except for access, layout and scale, for the erection of a maximum of 625 residential apartments (use class C3), 130sqm (GIA) retail or community use floorspace (flexible use incorporating use classes A1-A4/ D1), 2 gas governor compounds, site remediation, associated access, car parking, amenity space and landscaping after demolition of existing pipework, structures and telephone mast [Guildhall Ward] [Site Visit]
Members considered a major outline application with all matters reserved except for access, layout and scale from Heworth Green Developments Ltd and Moda Living Ltd for the erection of a maximum of 625 residential apartments (use class C3), 130sqm (GIA) retail or community use floorspace (flexible use incorporating use classes A1-A4/ D1), 2 gas governor compounds, site remediation, associated access, car parking, amenity space and landscaping after demolition of existing pipework, structures and telephone mast at the Former Gas Works, Heworth Green, York YO31 7UG.
An officer update was provided. Members were informed that revised plans had been received since the site meeting. The revised plans:
· Reduced the amount of development in block B2, which was the block closet Layerthorpe / Hawthorne Grove
· Reduced the total number of dwellings 607.
· Pushed back the 6-storey element away from Hawthorne Grove and the 7-storey omitted. The tallest parts of the development would be 3m higher than Apollo House. This was shown in an illustrative floor plan.
It was noted that the revised plans meant that the relevant numbers / percentages in the committee report were superseded. The S106 items remained detailed in section 7 and the on site affordable in Build to Rent was noted as thirty one roomed and ten two bedroomed apartments. It was noted that the highway works on Heworth Green included a zebra crossing and improved safety for cyclists at roundabouts.
Members were informed that a further objection had been received from Heworth Mews and an outline of this was given. They were also advised of amendments to condition Conditions 4, 5, 17, 21, 36 and 37; and minor changes to Conditions 20, 23, 24, 26, 39 that did not have a material change to their requirement. Members were advised that the additional information had been assessed and the planning balance and recommendation remained unchanged from the published report.
In answer to Member questions, officers confirmed that:
· The number of affordable housing had not changed from the previous application and the percentages in the housing mix stayed the same. Officers were happy with the mix of housing and had been working with the developers so that there was a variety in the types of flats in the design guide.
· The S106 contribution would go towards affordable housing.
· There needed to be a lot of housing on the site to make it viable.
· The detailed design of the roundabout had not been received but a contribution towards it had been secured.
· The housing densities were right for the city centre. The NPPF requirements for this were noted and the view of the Forward Planning Officer was explained in context of the case officer’s view.
· An explanation was given about the transition of the site between a surburban area and former industrial site.
· The detail of Conditions 21 and 30 was explained.
· The applicants were spending more than was required to make the buildings sustainable and the building fabric would be up to building regulations.
· The service charges would be ... view the full minutes text for item 46b
Demolition of Barleyfields and erection of 54 assisted living apartments and communal facilities; demolition of modern extensions to Ashbank and conversion to 4 assisted living apartments; associated parking and landscaping [Rawcliffe And Clifton Without Ward] [Site Visit]
Members considered a major full application from P18-02072 for the emolition of Barleyfields and erection of 54 no. assisted living apartments and communal facilities; demolition of modern extensions to Ashbank and conversion to 4 no. assisted living apartments; associated parking and landscaping at Ashbank, 1 Shipton Road Clifton York.
Members were advised by officers of an additional condition that the building(s) would not be demolished until a contract for the works had been agreed by the council. The site and scheme were then outlined to Members.
Following the update, Officers were asked and clarified that:
· There was a sufficient number of parking spaces.
· The trees on site had been covered by the tree survey.
· Regarding the bus stop nearby, the footways were narrow and a justifiable, affordable and deliverable solution could not be found to this.
· Regarding the possibility of the right of way to the side of the site, other sources of funding for this could be examined.
· Whilst there was considerable tree loss, high quality semi mature trees would be planted and the applicant would pay a green space contribution to works at the Homestead Park.
· Electric vehicle (EV) parking was included in Condition 6.
· With regard to provision being made for existing residents, affordable housing was included and there was no policy of the existing facility to be retained as council could only require what was required by housing policy, which had been achieved on site.
Janice Gray, a local resident, spoke in objection to the application. She expressed concern about the loss of 15 affordable housing units. She explained that there was a pelican crossing past the entrance to the site and she suggested that another rone was neededon Clifton Green. She suggested that the inclusion of senior activity equipment for the senior outdoor space would be good idea, adding that some of the S106 contribution to the Homestead Park could go towards this. She was asked and explained that the Barleyfields residents had relatives to walk them to the Homestead Park.
Liz Fowler spoke in support on behalf of the applicant. She noted that the not for profit provider owned and operated the existing Barleyfields and in considering their options deemed redevelopment the best option. The provider had acknowledged the closue of the existing scheme and had offered residents first refusal on the units. She noted the use of the site as an existing brownfield site and that it was policy compliant in regard to affordable housing.
In answer to questions raised by Members she confirmed that:
The access route would remain unobstructed.
The communal facilities included a staff kitchen and bistro and lounge for residents.
Regarding affordable units to rent, the application was policy complaint, and first refusal on the units had been offered to residents.
Cllr Smalley, Ward Member, spoke on the application noting that he was supportive of developments but concerns remained over he loss of tree canopy, the building overlooking residents and requirement for route to be maintained. He further explained ... view the full minutes text for item 46c
Resolved: That the application be approved subject to the conditions listed in the report.
i. The proposal would be inappropriate development in the green belt. It is harmful to the openness of the green belt and represents encroachment. Substantial weight must be given to this harm to the green belt in the planning balance. The proposal would also be harmful to the character and appearance of the area.
ii. In the planning balance it is acknowledged that the scheme proposes an upgrade to help new 5G technology and that using existing sites is preferable to erecting new masts. As such it is considered that the harm caused by the mast and equipment has a relatively low impact on openness of the green belt and encroachment, the local context and the harm to the character and appearance of the area, are clearly outweighed by the cumulative benefits of the scheme identified in paragraph 5.25 above and therefore very special circumstances are considered to exist which clearly outweigh the harm the green belt and any other harms.
iii. The application therefore accords with the NPPF, particularly Chapter 10, Policies GB1 and C1 of the Draft Plan 2018 and Policies GB1 and GP20 of the Deposit Draft Local Plan 2005.