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 Morley declared a personal non prejudicial interest in relation to Plans item 4a (Proposed University Campus Lying Between Field Lane and Low Lane, A64 Trunk Road and Hull Road, York (10/01825/REMM)) 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 25 November 2010.

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the last meeting of the Committee held on 25 November 2010 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 5.00pm on Wednesday 15 December 2010. 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.

This item invites Members to determine the following planning application:

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

Reserved matters application for the erection of a heat and power energy centre [Heslington Ward] [Site Visit]

The Committee considered a major reserved matters application, received from the University of York, for the erection of a heat and power energy centre.

Officers updated the Committee with the following information:

• Following publication of the agenda revised plans had been received which provided improved landscaping between the energy centre and the bus interchange and removal of the vents on the external walls and their incorporation in cowls on the roof. Officers confirmed that these changes addressed their earlier concerns.
• Amendment of Condition 1, to include details of the plans for approval.

·        Cllr Merrett had asked Officers to examine how the conditions could be strengthened to ensure that the university was committed to using sustainable sources. Confirmation that officers had re-examined the proposed conditions and proposed the inclusion of an additional condition to ensure that only biomass material was consumed at the heat and energy centre.

The applicant’s agent circulated the following plans for member’s information:

·        Details of the landscaping proposed for the site area.

·        North elevation of the building, detailing materials, ventilation louvers and cowls and the lowered flue and cowls.

·        Photomontages of four site viewpoints.

·        Sections through the site showing the revised flue heights and building sections.

·        Six proposed landscape cross sections of the site.

Representations in support of the proposals were received from the applicant’s agent. She confirmed that the development formed part of the university’s renewable energy strategy, which included a 10% reduction of its carbon emissions by 2010 and ensured that 10% of the energy demand would be from renewable resources. She went onto explain the landscaping proposals for the surrounding area.

Representations in objection were received from a representative of the Badger Hill Residents Group. He stated that they considered this a new application on which local residents should have been consulted at an earlier stage. He referred to possible issues of siting, noise, air quality and emissions and to concerns over the use of recycled timber or other fuels.

Representations in objection were also received from a resident of Field Lane. She confirmed that she supported green technologies but had grave concerns in relation to this application. She pointed out the close proximity of the adjacent residential area and to the height of the proposed chimney. As this was a new technology she confirmed that there was little information regarding possible emissions. She also questioned details of the fuel source and number of deliveries proposed to site.

Members questioned a number of points in relation to the application including:

·        The diameter of the chimney. It was confirmed that this would be no more that 1 metre in diameter.

·        Confirmation that the Secretary of State had included a specific condition in relation to noise when outline permission for the university campus had been granted. That no vibration issues had been identified in relation to the application and that existing university development was in closer proximity so it was in the applicant’s own interest to ensure that were no such issues.

·        Confirmation that the Environment  ...  view the full minutes text for item 26a

This report provides Members with an overview of the draft Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) for the former British Sugar/Manor School sites together with details of the planned consultation.

Consideration was given to a report, which provided Members with an overview of the draft Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) for the former British Sugar/Manor School sites and the consultation planned.

The Local Development Framework Working Group had in October considered a report, which updated on progress on the York Northwest Planning Framework, which included the draft Supplementary Planning Document. At that time Members had agreed an amended boundary for the development site and suggested a number of changes, which had now been made. At the Executive meeting in November approval had been given for the SPD document to go out for public consultation.

It was reported that the owners of the site, Associated British Foods had started master planning for the site earlier in the summer and that it was anticipated that a planning application would be submitted in May 2011.

Officers circulated copies of the following documents:

• Aerial view of the former British Sugar site.
• Plan of land use around the site.
• Plan of the York Northwest development sites.
• Plan of the vehicular access options.

Members then made the following comments in relation to the planning guidance document:

• Concern that Ward Members had not received copies of the consultation draft document prior to the commencement of public consultation.
• Need for the use of plain English in the document.
• Fig.14 – Existing green infrastructure on the former British Sugar site, this plan required the addition of the existing road network and amendment of the key colours to clarify detail.
• Concern that to ensure viability of the potential tram/train stop, and maximising public transport usage, the proposed local centre should be sited close to the stop.
• Concerns that sports facilities/playing fields were proposed off site and that school facilities should also be available for use by the wider community.

Following further discussion it was

RESOLVED:             That the content of the report be noted together with the various issues raised. ^1.

REASON:                  So that members can be informed of the emerging planning guidance being prepared for the former British Sugar/Manor School site.

This report informs Members of the Council’s performance in relation to appeals determined by the Planning Inspectorate in the 3 month period up to 31 October 2010. It provides a summary of the salient points from appeals determined in that period together with a list of outstanding appeals as at 31 October 2010.

The Committee considered a report, which provided them with details of the Council’s performance in relation to appeals determined by the Planning Inspectorate in the 3 month period up to 31 October 2010. The report also provided a summary of the salient points from appeals determined in that period and list of outstanding appeals.

Officers updated Members with the following amended figures in relation to paragraph 5 of the report:

‘For the 12 months up to 31 October 2010, CYC performance was 25.45% allowed, a slightly lower percentage than the previously reported 12 month period of 25.92%, and still below the national average.’

In answer to Members questions, Officers confirmed that:

• The special planning guidance in relation to the sub division of family housing in the city still formed part of Officers work programme but with limited resources it was unfortunately not a priority.
• Details of the site of the proposed telecommunications mast (outstanding appeal – Ref No: 10/00045/REF) would be emailed to Members.  ^1.
• In future it would also be possible to provide the information in Fig 1 of the Officer report for East and West and City Centre for the 12 month period and the outstanding appeals listed by Ward rather than Officer. ^2.

Following further discussion it was

RESOLVED:             That the report be received and noted.

REASON:                  So that Members can continue to be updated on appeal decisions within the CYC area and informed of the planning issues surrounding each case for future reference in determining planning applications.