Agenda and minutes

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.

At this point in the meeting, members were asked to declare any personal, prejudicial or pecuniary interests that they might have in the business on the agenda.

Councillor Brooks declared a personal non prejudicial interest in plans item 4b (Oliver House, Bishophill Junior) as she was a member of the Executive when agreement for the sale of land was made.

Councillor Ayre declared an interest in plans item 4b (Oliver House, Bishophill Junior) as he had been a member of the Executive when the sale of land was agreed and was still a member of the Executive. He stated that he did not feel comfortable taking part in the decision and left the table and took no part in the discussion or vote on this item.

Councillor Reid declared a personal and prejudicial interest in plans item 4a (Yorwaste, Harewood Whin, Tinker Lane, Rufforth) as the Council’s Director on the Yorwaste Board. She left the room for consideration of this item and Councillor Derbyshire (Vice Chair) took the chair for this item.

Councillor D’Agorne declared a personal non prejudicial interest in plans item 4a (Yorwaste, Harewood Whin, Tinker Lane, Rufforth) as a member of Cycling England and York Cycle Campaign.

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on Thursday 18 August 2016.

Resolved:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 18 August 2016 be approved as a correct record and then signed by the chair.

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 Wednesday 14 September 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 matters within the remit of the Planning Committee.

Members considered the following reports of the Assistant Director (Development Services, Planning and Regeneration) relating to the following planning applications which outlined the proposals and relevant planning considerations and set out the views of the consultees and officers.

Construction of a waste transfer station with associated ancillary buildings, hardstandings, car parking and alterations to access [Rural West York]

Members considered a major full application by Yorwaste Ltd for the construction of a waste transfer station with associated ancillary buildings, hard standings, car parking and alterations to access.

The Committee had previously considered this application at their meeting on 12 May 2016 and had resolved to grant planning permission for the proposed development subject to the conclusion of a Section 106 Agreement. The draft Section 106 agreement included provision for a cycle track running along the frontage of the site with the B1224 Wetherby Road. Members noted that the applicant had subsequently sought to have this requirement re-considered in terms of the requirements of Section 122 of the CIL Regulations, which the provisions of Section 106 Agreement are required to meet, as another cycle route running to the north of the site had now been constructed and was in use.

A hard copy of the annexes to this agenda item, which had been omitted in error when the agenda was originally printed, were circulated to Members for their information. These comprised the original committee report presented to the 12 May meeting, the officer update from that meeting and a minute extract of that meeting.

Mr Geoff Derham, Group Operations Director for Yorkwaste, had registered under public participation in case members had any questions to ask him at the meeting. No questions were asked.

Members noted that, as there was already alternative provision in place, there was no need for the requirement for a cycle track cycle track running along the frontage of the site with the B1224 Wetherby Road.

Resolved: 

That the application be approved subject to the conditions listed in the report considered at 12 May 2016 meeting, the conclusion of a Section 106 Agreement to include the matters referred to in the Minute of 12 May 2016 meeting but without the requirement for the provision of a cycle way along the B1224 Wetherby Road frontage of the site and subject to the conditions set out in the minute of 12 May 2016 meeting.

Reason:    

Further re-examination of the requirement for a road side cycle track in consultation with Highways and PROW officers along with Rufforth and Knapton Parish Council indicates that it would not comply with the statutory tests for acceptable planning obligations  set out at bullet points a) and c) of Regulation 122 of the CIL Regulations 2010. Officers do not consider that the removal of this obligation from the proposed Section 106 Agreement affects the planning balance of this planning application or that it should otherwise affect the resolution of the 12 May 2016 meeting.

Demolition of existing building and erection of Retirement Living Housing for the elderly with associated communal facilities, landscaping and car parking [Micklegate] [Site Visit]

Members considered a major full application by McCarthy & Stone Retirement Lifestyles Ltd for the demolition of the existing building and erection of Retirement Living Housing for the elderly with associated communal facilities, landscaping and car parking.

The Chair reported that she had received a marketing leaflet from McCarthy & Stone and several emails from residents in relation to this application and advised that she had forwarded these onto the planning case officer.

Officers provided a comprehensive update.They advised that  paragraph 4.31 of the report should read “18.5 % developer profit ...” and not 18% as stated and informed Members of the following amended and additional conditions.

·        Condition 2 - A revised drawing had been supplied and therefore condition 2 needed amending to incorporate it.

·        Condition 5 – wording should be amended to read at the beginning “Prior to construction above foundation level a landscaping plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA which shall illustrate……..”

·        Condition 6 - Detail has been submitted in respect of items b) c) and e) of this condition 6 and it is recommended that those items be deleted from the condition.

·        Condition 20 should at the same time be amended to read “The premises shall be used for Retirement Housing (Category 2) for a primary occupant aged 60 years or over....” The reason should also be amended to remove the reference to Later Living.

·        Additional Conditions - In view of further detailed comments from Highway Network Management it was recommended that conditions be added to cover: the junction between the internal access road and the highway; reinstating the kerbing and footway after removal of existing vehicular crossings not being retained; highway works; and a travel plan.

·        Informative to cover works on the highway

Officers advised that since the committee report had been written, further consultation responses had been received. Flood Risk Management had had confirmed that they had no objection to the proposed development. A further 16 letters of representation had also been received, 14 of objection and two of support. The letters of objection expressed concern that the proposal would greatly increase the level of on-street parking in the locality, would harm the setting of St Mary Bishophill Junior and the wider City skyline and would harm the residential amenity of neighbouring properties. The letters of support highlighted the benefits to the wider community of the development of a specialist residential use in close proximity to the city centre.

In response, officers advised that it had been confirmed that the proposal would be removed by Traffic Regulation Order (TRO)from the residents parking area with the result that any on-street parking associated with the site would be subject to the same controls as any other ad hoc parking in the locality. Officers advised that the design of the scheme had been extensively amended in order to lessen any impact upon the setting of St Mary Bishophill Junior and the Central Historic Core Area and any impact upon the residential amenity of neighbouring  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33.

Reserved matters application for approval of access, appearance and landscaping for egg production building (following outline approval 15/02439/OUTM) [Wheldrake]

Members considered a major reserved matters application by Mr Chris Hobson for approval of access, appearance and landscaping for an egg production building (following outline approval 15/02439/OUTM).

Officers provided a brief update to Members. They advised that condition 8 should make reference to the first 10m of the access road from Broad Highway needing to be tarmac. They also informed Members that two letters have been received from residents since the report had been written. One letter raised concerns about the safety of pedestrians using the proposed access road and questioned whether there would be protective barriers or a raised kerb to mark pedestrian areas. The other letter stated that they were unhappy with the way that the outline application had been dealt with.

Mr Ian Pick, the agent for the application, had registered to speak at the meeting but advised Members that he no longer felt the need to address the committee.

Members accepted that the principle of development had already been accepted and agreed by the committee previously. Members felt that the access road had been designed taking account of pedestrian safety and acknowledged that the road was of sufficient width to allow an HGV to pass a pedestrian safely, and passing places were only needed in order for two vehicles to pass each other.

Resolved: 

That the application be approved subject to the conditions listed in the report and the amended condition below.

Amended Condition 8

The first 10m of the access with Broad Highway shall be constructed of tarmac. The rest of the proposed access road linking Broad Highway with the egg production unit buildings shall be constructed of a 200mm base course of hardcore, topped with 60mm of graded stone. The wearing course for the road surface shall be 40mm of tarmac planings rolled and compacted to create a smooth surface.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure that it is fit for purpose.

Reason:    

It is considered that the proposed details submitted with the application are acceptable in respect to key issues including the impact on public rights of way, highway safety and the character and appearance of the countryside and Green Belt. It is considered that there are not any reasons to withhold the grant of reserved matters approval.

It is considered that the application, subject to the suggested conditions complies with relevant advice in the National Planning Policy Framework and guidance in the Wheldrake Village Design Statement.  In addition, it is considered acceptable in respect to policies of the Local Plan, particularly GP1 (Design), GB1 (Development in the Green Belt) and NE1 (Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows).