Agenda and minutes
Venue: Remote Meeting
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 Rowley declared a personal non prejudicial interest in Agenda Item 3b (York City Football Club 19/00246/FULM) as the firm he owned was a sponsor of the club. The Chair, Cllr Cullwick also declared a personal non prejudicial interest on the same item as the former Chaplain to the club. Noting the link between the arrangements between the sale of the land and the Community Stadium, Cllr Ayre in his capacity as Executive Member for Finance and Performance declared an interest as did Cllr D’Agorne, as Executive Member for Transport declared an interest and both undertook to not take part in debate on the application. Concerning Agenda Item 3c (23 Piccadilly 9/02563/FULM) Cllr Fitzpatrick declared a non prejudicial interest as Ward Councillor and resident of Walmgate.
At this point in the meeting, members of the public who have registered their wish to speak can do so.
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 remote meetings.
The deadline for registering at this meeting is 5:00pm on Tuesday, 11 August 2020.
Under current Standing Orders for remote meetings of the Planning Committee, members of the public can speak only on the matters or applications to be considered by the Committee at the meeting.
To register, please contact Democratic Services on the details at the foot of this agenda. You will then be advised on the procedures for dialling into the remote meeting.
Webcasting of Remote Public Meetings
Please note that, subject to available resources, this remote public meeting will be webcast including any registered public speakers who have given their permission. The remote public meeting can be viewed live and on demand at www.york.gov.uk/webcasts.
During coronavirus, we've made some changes to how we're running council meetings. See our coronavirus updates (www.york.gov.uk/COVIDDemocracy ) for more information on meetings and decisions.
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.
Erection of 85 apartments in two blocks with seven town houses with associated parking, cycle storage and landscaping (revised scheme) [Micklegate Ward]
Members considered a major full application from Mr D Coppack for the erection of 85 apartments in two blocks with seven town houses with associated parking, cycle storage and landscaping (revised scheme) at Land South Of The Residence Bishopthorpe Road York.
An officer update was given and Members were informed that due to the need for the applicant to undertake a bat survey, it was recommended that the application be deferred.
Cllr Hollyer moved, and Cllr Pavlovic seconded, that the application be deferred. In accordance with the revised Standing Orders, a named vote was taken. Cllrs Ayre, Barker, D’Agorne, Daubeney, Fenton, Fisher, Fitzpatrick, Hollyer, Kilbane, Lomas, Rowley, Pavlovic and Cullwick (Chair) all voted in favour of this proposal, and it was:
Resolved: That the application be deferred.
Reason: In order to allow the applicant is to undertake a further bat survey in early September. It would not be appropriate to determine the application until the survey has been carried out and the results collated and submitted to the LPA for the consideration of the Ecologist.
The meeting adjourned at 16:50 and resumed at 17:05.
Erection of 93 dwellings with associated access, infrastructure, landscaping, public open space and parking. [Clifton Ward]
Cllr Ayre and Cllr D’Agorne withdrew from the meeting for the consideration of this application.
Members considered a major full application from Persimmon Homes Limited And York City Football Club for the Erection of 93 dwellings with associated access, infrastructure, landscaping, public open space and parking at York City Football Club, Bootham Crescent, York YO30 7AQ.
The Development Manager gave a presentation on the application detailing the site layout, street scene and house types. In response to questions from the Committee, Officers clarified that:
· The condition regarding materials was a standard and the houses on the site would be red brick in keeping with the area.
· There were some records of where ashes were interred and there would be an archaeological scheme of investigation.
· There would be a degree of service charges for the affordable housing and in order to help minimise this the affordable housing had been located in one block.
· The location of the affordable houses, social rent houses and houses for sale had not yet been identified.
· The strategic housing assessment identified that most housing in need was for one and two bedroom properties.
· Concerning affordable housing, there were four one-bedroom properties, eight two-bedroomed, and six three-bedroomed.
· There was no extra strain on drainage on the site.
The following spoke in support:
York City FC's Stadium Development Director Steven Taylor addressed the Committee, and responded to Members’ questions as follows:
· Persimmon Homes Limited was working with York City Football Club and Historic England to agree protocols on the on instructions for ashes.
· The geophysical survey undertaken by Bradford University found no evidence of metal caskets and it was noted that there may be leather caskets. Fans had been consulted and it was not believed that there were any ashes remaining on site. It was believed that away from the pitch, ashes may have been interred in Shipton Street in from of the Longhurst stand.
· The club was aware that it would need to seek permission from the Ministry of Justice for the removal of ashes.
Paul Butler, Agent for the Applicants, then addressed the Committee, and in answer Members’ confirmed that the service charges would need to be discussed with the Applicants.
Members then debated the proposals, after which Cllr Pavlovic Taylor moved, and Cllr Hollyer seconded, that delegated authority be given to the Assistant Director of Planning and Public Protection to APPROVE the application, subject to the conditions listed in the report. During debate Officers clarified the NPPF condition and S106 contribution. In accordance with the revised Standing Orders, a named vote was taken. Cllrs Daubeney, Fenton, Fisher, Fitzpatrick, Hollyer, Kilbane, Lomas, Rowley, Pavlovic and Cullwick (Chair) all voted in favour of this proposal, and Cllr Barker voted against the proposal. Therefore it was:
Resolved: That delegated authority be given to the Assistant Director of Planning and Public Protection to APPROVE the application subject to conditions and completion of a s106 agreement to secure following obligations as set out in the report. ... view the full minutes text for item 65.
Erection of no.132 bed hotel with bar/ restaurant, after demolition of existing office building. [Guildhall Ward]
Cllr Ayre and Cllr D’Agorne returned to the meeting for the consideration of this application.
Members considered a major full application from Mr Gareth Jackson for the Erection of no.132 bed hotel with bar/ restaurant, after demolition of existing office building at 23 Piccadilly York YO1 9PG.
The Development Manager gave a presentation on the application outlining the street scene, floor plan, and Piccadilly and St Denys Road elevations. Members raised a number of questions to which officers confirmed:
· The view of Historic England
· The view from Walmgate Bar
· Possible structural harm to the Grade 1 listed St Denys church was a matter between the developer and the Church.
· The visibility of the proposed building from different viewpoints
· That when looking at the Conservation Area in Picciafilly, the existing building (propsed for demolishon) was not deemed of merit.
An officer update was then given which outlined the Consultation responses from the Conservation Area Advisory Panel and Environment Agency. Further information from applicants on the Sustainable Design and Construction, local workforce / skills. Members were also provided with amendments concerning conditions 5 and 22.
In response to questions from Members, Officers confirmed that:
· The poplar tree was not within the site
· The quality of the existing building, which had not been identified as a building of merit in the conservation area appraisal.
· The views of the site (using google earth).
· The government had brought in permitted development rights to turn offices into housing stock.
· The loss of an existing building was a consideration in a conservation area and it’s importance wuld be set against the importance of what was being put in it’s place.
· The façade of the Banana Warehouse in Piccadilly was a building of merit.
· Permits would be needed to demolish the existing building as it was in a conservation area
[Cllr Pavlovic left the meeting at 19:35]
During questions a number of Members suggested that it would be useful to resume site visits to application sites.
The following spoke in objection to the application, raising issues in relation to the impact on amenity, structure of the church, access to the church hall and access to the visual setting of the church and viability of the existing building.
· Jerry Scott, a local resident
· Dr Charles Kightly, Churchwarden and Chair of the PCC, St Denys Walmgate. In answer to questions raised by Members he explained that:
o Access to the church hall could not be maintained
o There had been a meeting with the application and his objections stood
o The developers said that the existing building could not be reused
o He did not object to the existing building being used as a hotel
Tim Ross (Agent for the Applicant) and Jay Ahluwalia (Dominvs Group) addressed the Committee, detailing the positive impact on local employment, the sustainable design of the building and the reasons why the existing building was not feasible. Along with a number of colleagues available to answer ... view the full minutes text for item 66.