Local democracy during coronavirus

During coronavirus, we've made some changes to how we're running council meetings. See our coronavirus updates for more information on meetings and decisions.

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Remote Meeting

No. Item


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 Kilbane as Ward Councillor for Micklegate declared a non prejudicial interest in agenda item 4a. There were no further declarations of interest.



Minutes pdf icon PDF 150 KB

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 9 July 2020 and 13 August 2020 (to follow).



Resolved:  That the vote taken for the application for North Selby Mine, New Road, Deighton, York [19/00078/OUTM] in the minutes of the meeting held on 9 July 2020   be checked by the Democracy Officer and be brought back to a future meeting for approval.


Public Participation

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 remote meetings. The deadline for registering at this meeting is at 5.00pm on Tuesday 6 October 2020.


To register to speak please visit www.york.gov.uk/AttendCouncilMeetings to fill out an online registration form. If you have any questions about the registration form or the meeting please contact the Democracy Officer for the meeting whose details can be found at the foot of the agenda.  


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.



Plans List

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.



Land South of The Residence, Bishopthorpe Road, York [18/02582/FULM]


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) on the land south of The Residence, Bishopthorpe Road, York. 


The Head of Development Services outlined the site plan, location plan, proposed elevations, built environment analysis, outline masterplan and location of the former factory buildings. She then gave a committee update, detailing the status of the Outline Planning Permission [09/01606/OUTM] which had lapsed. She noted the provisions that had been set out in that permission including the heights and scope.


She noted the heights in the current proposals, noting the building heights across the wider Terry’s development to roof level. She updated Members on the service charges in respect of affordable housing noting that the applicant has confirmed that discussions between the developer and the chosen provider JRHT are at an advanced stage. She then gave an update on additional representations that had been received. She confirmed that the additional information has been assessed and the planning balance and recommendation remained unchanged from the published report. She was asked and demonstrated the view from Goddards (National Trust regional office) on Tadcaster Road.


Following the update, Members asked a number of questions to which Officers clarified that:

·        The impact of the harm was complicated and the existing planning permission mass and bulk was less that what was proposed in this application.

·        When considering harm, the Committee would need to consider what was formerly on the site and in the context of the Terrys redevelopment there are townhouses and apartments. The Historic England views were noted.

·        The taller parts of the buildings were perpendicular and the former factory building could be seen through the gap.

·        Concerning the objection from the CCG, there had been some involvement from them regarding the care home on the site, and this was the first objection they had raised in respect of the cumulative impact on GP surgeries.


·        The applicant had applied for 92 dwellings.

·        Regarding the pedestrian and cycle link, the land adjacent to the site is council land and it should be possible to use this for the link and the land was linked to an existing highway.

·        There was room for a fire engine on the access road.

·        It was the responsibility of the management company to manage parking on the site.

·        The commuted sum for the extra consulting rooms for the GP surgery had been agreed.

·        Regarding affordable housing, 18 units would be

·        provided on site with an off-site financial contribution in respect of 0.4 of a unit. The detailed tenure mix would be resolved through a Section 106 Agreement.

·        The site was considered a brownfield site.

·        Planning applications are considered on a case by case basis. The application was been assessed and was considered as acceptable.

·        An explanation of how the education contribution was calculated was given.


Public speakers

Celia Loughran, representing Terry’s of York Planning Action Group, spoke in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 71.


Back to the top of the page