Agenda and draft minutes
Venue: Remote Meeting
Contact: Democratic Services
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, on behalf of the Labour Group, noted that although the Labour Party had objected to the application, no Members of the Committee had predetermined the application. Cllr Craghill noted that although the Green Party had objected to the application, no Members of the Committee had predetermined the application. Cllr Rowley noted that a Conservative colleague had objected, he too had not predetermined the application
To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 13 August 2020.
Resolved: That the minutes of the meeting held on 13 August 2020 be approved and then signed by the chair as a correct record at a later date.
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.
Reserved matters application for layout, scale, appearance, landscaping and access for the construction of the primary vehicle route and associated roads, infrastructure, landscaping and alterations to the existing road network pursuant to outline planning permission 18/01884/OUTM [Holgate Ward]
Members considered a Major Reserved Matters Application from Homes England, Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd and City of York Council for layout, scale, appearance, landscaping and access for the construction of the primary vehicle route and associated roads, infrastructure, landscaping and alterations to the existing road network pursuant to outline planning permission 18/01884/OUTM at York Central Leeman Road York.
The Assistant Director Planning and Public Protection noted that this was the first reserved matters application to be presented to the Committee following the outline planning permission in March 2019. He explained that many of the issues raised by objectors, including highways, were addressed as part of the outline planning permission and were not for debate at the meeting, which was for reserved matters.
The Head of Development Services gave an update detailing further comments that had been received from Ainsty Internal Drainage Board, York Civic Trust, and additional comments from Yorkshire Water and Historic England. An update was given on an access, highways, sustainable transport, design, layout, appearance and landscaping and comments received from environmental protection. Members were advised that the additional comments had been taken into account and as a result the recommendation was unchanged from the published report.
The Head of Development Services then presented the application detailing the site location plan. This was followed by questions from the Committee to which officers clarified:
· Regarding the archaeological assessment, there had been several evaluations during the summer and the information for the deeper deposits in area 1 (Holgate Beck) was awaited. There had been some preliminary analysis and a mitigation strategy had been put together as part of the archaeological management plan and there was a condition for this. It was confirmed that there was no organic paleo environmental evidence near the station in area 2.
· How archaeology was and had been recorded. Should any archaeology of national significance be found, preservation in situ would be undertaken
· What steps would be taken to mitigate the cycle lane width.
· That the process of the stopping up order for Leeman Road was a completely different process to planning, and this meeting was to solely to consider reserved matters.
[The meeting adjourned from 17:08 to 17:50]
Paul Clarke spoke in objection to the application noting that there had been two letters of support of the council website and sixty in objection. He explained that the proposal to make traffic through the Leeman road tunnel (Marble Arch) a traffic light controlled one way system would cause congestion was not in the interests of residents. He suggested a number of changes to traffic flow to address this. He also felt that the consultation was not carried out in good faith.
In response to questions raised by Members, he explained that the traffic on Leeman road was busy all day, and particularly during the morning and evening rush hours. With regard to consultation he noted that he had attended a number of informal consultation events.
Cllr Doughty spoke in objection. He noted that although ... view the full minutes text for item 76.