Agenda and minutes

At this point, members are asked to declare any personal or prejudicial interests they may have in the business on this agenda.

Members were invited to declare at this point in the meeting any personal or prejudicial interests they might have in the business on the agenda.

Councillor R Watson declared a personal non-prejudicial interest in Plans item 4a  (Land Lying to the South of Huntington Stadium and Waterworld, Jockey Lane, Huntington, York) as his business partner lived adjacent to the site.

Councillor Pierce declared a personal non-prejudicial interest in Plans item 4b  (Proposed University Campus lying between Field Lane, Common Lane, A64 Trunk Road and Hull Road, York) as a member of the Heslington East Community Forum and former member of staff and student of the University.

Councillor Morley declared a personal non-prejudicial interest in Plans item 4b  (Proposed University Campus lying between Field Lane, Common Lane, A64 Trunk Road and Hull Road, York) as a member of the Heslington East Community Forum.

To approve and sign the minutes of the last meeting of the Planning Committee held on 21 January 2009.

RESOLVED:             That the minutes of the last meeting of the Committee held on 21 January 2009 be approved and 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 5pm the day before the meeting. 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.

It was reported that there had been no registrations to speak at the meeting under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme on general issues within the remit of the Committee.

This item invites Members to determine the following planning applications:

Members considered reports of the Assistant Director (Planning and Sustainable Development), relating to the following planning applications, outlining the proposals and relevant planning considerations and setting out the views and advice of consultees and officers.

Development of global banking centre with ancillary power supply, substations and offices with associated access, parking, fencing, landscaping and ecology habitat [Huntington and New Earswick Ward?[] [Site Visit]

Consideration was given to a major full application, submitted by HSBC Bank Plc and Oakgate (Monk’s Cross) Ltd, for the development of a global banking data centre with ancillary power supply, substations and offices with associated access, parking, fencing, landscaping and ecology habitat (revised and additional information received).

Officers circulated an update, which included the following points together with site plans, proposed elevations and a comparative sketch in relation to building heights:

• Clarification that the most southern area of the application site was allocated as Green Belt and Recreation Opportunity Area in the Draft Local Plan. This application therefore constituted a departure from the Plan and if approval were granted this would require reference to the Secretary of State;
• Environment, Conservation and Sustainable Development confirmed no objections as extensive landscaping proposed and the building materials were acceptable;
• Natural England were happy with the use of PV cells as part of the energy strategy and had no further concerns in relation to encroachment of car parking in the Green Belt;
• Highways Agency confirmed that the Travel Plan was acceptable subject to the Council securing its implementation and a condition restricting the use of the building to a data centre;
• York Natural Environment Panel supported what they felt was a worthwhile positive scheme with an enthusiasm for community involvement;
• Following a query raised by the Committee on site it was confirmed that the proposal did provide an amenity area for employees to the western boundary adjacent to the security lodge;
• The applicant had confirmed in the Energy Statement that the potential export of the waste heat to the Waterworld swimming facility would save approximately 1,000,000 kilo watt hours of energy per year with the proposed engineering design of the building saving 85 million kilo watt hours of per year when compared to a typical data centre;
• In answer to a query raised at the site visit it was confirmed that the revised Sustainability Statement accompanying the application confirmed that a rainwater harvesting system was proposed. The water harvested would be used for the toilets and irrigation of the surrounding landscape;
• Officers clarified that the potential waste heat transfer to Waterworld would be secured by the applicant entering into a Section 106 agreement to carry out a feasibility study to seek whether the waste heat transfer was feasible/viable;
• Amendments were required to the following conditions listed in the report – 5, 12, 14, 18, 27, 28, and 33 following receipt of additional information and to cover a number of outstanding points;
• Deletion of Conditions 13 and 21 as part of these conditions had already been carried out by the applicant and had been covered in other conditions;  
• The addition of a conditions relating to the proposed materials and the requirement of samples;
• Additional condition requiring details of the paladin fencing colour;
• Additional condition specifying the height of the proposed building;
• Additional condition restricting the use of the building as a data centre;
• Additional informatives in relation to the removal of hazardous waste, surface  ...  view the full minutes text for item 52a

Construction of car park and bus interchange with associated footpaths, cycleways and landscaping. [Heslington Ward]

Members considered a major reserved matters application, submitted by the University of York, for the construction of a car park and bus interchange with associated footpaths, cycleways and landscaping.

Officers circulated a sheet, which set out details of draft conditions to replace Conditions 1 and 8 in the Committee report. The replacement conditions covered the receipt of revised plans. Officers also referred to an amendment required to the report on page 45, paragraph 1.1 which referred to a car park for 132 cars for the new campus, which should now read 126 cars.

Representations in support of the application were received from the applicant’s agent who confirmed that this application was part of the transport strategy for both University campuses. She explained that there was to be a peripheral car park strategy with no localised parking. The car parks would be barrier controlled with a strict access policy together the promotion of a non car initiatives. There would be an extensive pedestrian/cycling network together with bus shelters, seating and timetabling information at the interchange. She also confirmed that the No 4 bus service would turn at the new interchange rather than at Heslington Hall and that two additional services, No 6 and 10 would also use the site.

In answer to Members concerns in relation to users of the car park, the agent confirmed that staff from Cluster 1 would use this but that, in the longer term, it would be solely used by visitors to the University. They also referred to the rolling out of a sequential programme for the issue of car park permits and to initiatives that the University were to undertake to reduce car park use. They also confirmed that the original University approval had conditioned that lighting on the site would be dark sky compliant.

RESOLVED:             That the application be approved subject to the conditions listed in the report and the following amended conditions:

Amended Condition 1: The development hereby permitted shall be carried out only in accordance with the following plans:- 30080-3-P-101/D, DD110317.L.301/L, DD110317.P.302A/E, DD110317.P.302C/B, DD110317.P.302D/D and DD110317.L.303 and any plans or details subsequently agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority as amendment to the approved plans.

Amended Condition 8: The landscaping scheme shown on the approved plans shall be implemented by the end of the next planting season following substantive completion of the development.  Any trees or plants which within a period of five years from the completion of the development, die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased, shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority agrees alternatives in writing. This also applies to any existing trees that are shown to be retained within the approved landscape scheme. Any works to existing trees that are protected by a tree preservation order (TPO) are subject to local authority approval within and beyond this five year period.

REASON:                  In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the proposal,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 52b