Agenda and minutes
Venue: The George Hudson Board Room - 1st Floor West Offices (F045). View directions
Contact: Louise Cook/Catherine Clarke (job-share) Democracy Officers
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.
Councillor Reid declared a personal and prejudicial interest in plans item 4b (Yorwaste, Harewood Whin, Tinker Lane, Rufforth) as the Council’s Director on the Yorwaste Board.
She also declared a personal and prejudicial interest in plans list item 4c (Coal Yard, Mansfield Street) as she had a business connection with the applicant’s family.
Councillor Reid left the room for consideration of both these applications and took no part in the debate or vote on either application. Councillor Derbyshire (Vice Chair) took the chair for both these applications.
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 5pm on 16 November 2016. 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 Officers for the meeting, on the details at the foot of this agenda.
Filming or Recording Meetings
Please note this meeting will be filmed and webcast and that includes 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, i.e. tweeting. Anyone wishing to film, record or take photos at any public meeting should contact the Democracy Officers (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
under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme on general
issues 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 poultry farm comprising 6 no poultry sheds with ancillary buildings, access road and landscaped embankments (resubmission). [Rural West York Ward] [Site Visit]
Members considered a major full application by H Barker and Son Ltd for the erection of a poultry farm comprising six poultry sheds with ancillary buildings, access road and landscaped embankments.
Officers advised that, since the committee report had been published, the applicant had submitted an amended landscape plan and made associated amendments to the Environmental Statement. They advised that their recommendation had therefore changed to DEFER, as until expiry of the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulation publicity requirements, the application could not be determined. They advised that the intention was to bring the application back to the December Committee Meeting.
Resolved: That consideration of the application be deferred to a future Planning Committee meeting.
Reason: As the application cannot be determined until the expiry of the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulation publicity requirements.
Variation of condition 4 of permitted application 00/02689/FUL (extension of Harewood Whin Waste Disposal Site) to extend time period for tipping operations for a further 15 years.
[Rural West York Ward]
Members considered a major full application by Yorwaste Ltd for the variation of condition 4 of permitted application 00/02689/FUL (extension of Harewood Whin Waste Disposal Site) to extend the time period for tipping operations for a further 15 years.
Officers advised that they had revised their recommendation to seek delegated authority to approve the application subject to conditions and, if necessary, a legal agreement under s.106 of the Act. They explained that the approval of an application under section 73 of the Act would normally re-impose the conditions imposed on the previous planning permission unless those conditions were no longer considered necessary or where they should be replaced by a different condition (for example where details had previously been approved should be carried through to the later permission). They noted that a number of the conditions listed on pages 29-37 required further amendment in consultation with the applicant. Furthermore, the original planning permission was subject to a legal agreement under Section106 of the Act and further investigation was required as to whether a deed of variation was required to tie the obligations secured under that agreement to this permission.
With regard to paragraph 3.9 of the report in relation to external consultations, officers advised that “Treemendous” York raised no objection to the proposal but had asked the authority to re-introduce reference to the previously agreed nature reserve. “Treemendous” had pointed out that extending the period of operations could delay site restoration and asked if it would be possible for the restoration to nature reserve to be carried out at an earlier stage. Officers confirmed that the application sought to vary a condition of the original permission and all the other conditions would be re-applied if they remained relevant. This included the requirements to progressively reclaim and manage the site in accordance with a scheme to be approved by the planning authority (condition 26).
Geoff Derham, Group Operations Director at Yorwaste, addressed the committee in support of the application. He advised that there were two main reasons to extend tipping operations at Harewood Whin Landfill for a further 15 years. Firstly, it provided a strategic backstop to Allerton Park by providing York and North Yorkshire somewhere to deposit their waste should a long term serious incident happen at Allerton Park which took it offline. Secondly, the existing permission for tipping at Harewood Whin was due to expire in June 2017 however York’s waste and another council’s waste were not going to be used as part of the commissioning waste for Allerton Park and therefore, in order to keep the costs down for tax payers, tipping into Harewood Whin into one of the approved void spaces was one of the options until Allerton Park came fully on stream. In terms of landscaping and reinstatement, he informed Members that much of the site had already been restored, capped and landscaped. He advised that they had met with “Treemendous”, the parish council, the local plan group ... view the full minutes text for item 52.
Erection of four storey block for student accommodation (84 units) following demolition of existing building. [Guildhall Ward]
Members considered a major full application by Horwell Bros Ltd for the erection of a four storey block for student accommodation (84 units) following the demolition of the existing building.
Members were reminded that consideration of this application had been deferred by Planning Committee on 18 August 2016 to enable further liaison to take place between the applicant and officers in order to seek satisfactory details of a flood evacuation plan. They advised that the site was within flood zone 3a, with a high risk of flooding, and the proposal was classed as a “more vulnerable” use. The building itself was flood resilient with floor levels set 600mm above the 1 in 100 year flood level. The key issue was to ensure that occupants could safely evacuate the building in the event of a flood.
Officers confirmed that a flood evacuation plan had now been received, details of which were set out in paragraph 4.44 of the report. Although the preference was for a “dry” evacuation route to be established, this would have passed over adjacent land that was not within the ownership or control of the applicant. The applicant had investigated this option but had been unable to reach agreement with adjacent landowners in order to secure such a route. Officers advised that the revised evacuation plan would therefore consist of:
· Two site wardens who would be in attendance 24 hours a day, 7 days a week with flood warden duties including sweep clearance of the building once occupants had been evacuated
· A flood evacuation mode for the fire alarm system
· Environment Agency flood evacuation training for all residents and staff at the start of each academic year and for mid term occupants and new staff
· Shuttle transfer from the site to a designated muster point in flood zone 1
Officers advised that condition 26 required the flood evacuation plan to be fully operational upon occupation of the building, and also required floor levels to be no less than 10.96m AOD, 600mm above the 1 in 10 year flood level.
Although concerns were still raised by the Council`s Emergency Planning officers in that it may create a demand for assistance from the emergency services should anyone become stranded in the building, the Environment Agency raised no objections and were involved in drafting the revised flood evacuation plan.
With the revised evacuation plan in place, officers confirmed that they considered that the development satisfied the requirements of the exception test therefore they recommended approval with a minor amendment to condition 25.
A registration to speak at the meeting in relation to student accommodation had been received from Mr Ward, a local resident, but he did not attend the meeting.
Mr Bob Beal, the applicant’s agent, addressed the committee in support of the application. He advised Members that he had worked closely with officers to resolve design issues. He acknowledged the concerns with regard to use of the site as employment land and assured Members that alternative uses for the site ... view the full minutes text for item 53.
This report (presented to both Planning Committee and the Area Planning Sub Committee) informs Members of the Council’s performance in relation to appeals determined by the Planning Inspectorate between 1 July and 30 September 2016, and provides a summary of the salient points from appeals determined in that period. A list of outstanding appeals to date of writing is also included.
Members considered a report which informed them of the Council’s performance in relation to appeals determined by the Planning Inspectorate between 1 July and 30 September 2016and provided them with a summary of the salient points from appeals determined in that period.
Resolved: That the report be noted.
Reason: To inform Members of the current position in relation to planning appeals against the Council’s decisions as determined by the Planning Inspectorate.