Agenda and draft minutes

The following sites were inspected before the meeting:

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

At this point in the meeting Members were asked to declare any personal or prejudicial interests which they had in the business on this agenda.

Cllr Reid declared a prejudicial interest in plans items 3a and 3b (89 The Mount) as she was a member of the licensing sub-committee that determined a licensing application for a provisional statement for this site.

At this point in the meeting members of the public who have registered their wish to speak regarding specific planning applications, other agenda items or matters within the remit of the Sub-Committee can do so. Anyone who wishes to register or requires further information is requested to contact the Democracy Officer on the contact details listed at the foot of this agenda. The deadline for registering is Monday 31^st July 2006 at 5.00pm.

It was reported that there had been no registrations to speak, under the City of York Council Public Participation Scheme, on general issues within the remit of the Sub-Committee.

Members will consider a schedule of reports of the Assistant Director (Planning and Sustainable Development), relating to planning applications with an outline of the proposals and relevant policy considerations and the views and advice of consultees and officers.

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

Members considered a full application for use as a hotel including single storey and two storey pitched roof extensions (with rooms in the roof) and erection of new two storey (with rooms in the roof) pitched roof bedroom block, submitted by Stephen Rodwell.

Officers updated the committee that they had received an additional concern from a resident regarding noise and disturbance from deliveries, but that there were already proposed conditions to restrict delivery times.

Officers also informed the committee that Condition 17 needed to be replaced with a condition requiring the submission of a detailed methods of works statement.

Mr Gill addressed the committee in support of the application but requested safeguards on noise and privacy, in particular that deliveries did not start until 8.00am instead of 7.30am, and that lighting be kept at a low level to reduce glare.

Mr Phillips, the agent for the applicant, addressed the committee in support of the item and confirmed that they could manage deliveries being received after 8am and agreed that lighting could be kept at a low level so as not to shine into neighbours’ or residents’ windows.

The meeting was adjourned for 5 minutes to investigate what licensing conditions had been imposed on the site in relation to outside events and entertainment. Officers then updated the committee on the conditions that had been imposed by the licensing sub-committee on the premises.

Cllr Macdonald subsequently moved and Cllr Horton seconded a motion to remove condition 25 and on being put to the vote the motion was declared lost.

Members considered an application for internal and external alterations including the erection of a part one part two storey pitched roof extension; demolition of northeast wing (no.89A) and part of the coach House and erection of two storey pitched roof building in the grounds; all in connection with use as a hotel, submitted by Stephen Rodwell.

Members considered an application for the erection of a single dwelling with garage and stable block, submitted by Mr and Mrs Deighton.

Officers updated the committee that under paragraph 3.4, comments were received from residents of 39 Station Road and not 41 Station Road. Officers circulated a plan showing the Green Belt boundary in the Development Control’s current plan and the settlement limit in the Poppleton Village Design Statement.

Members raised concerns about whether the site was still within the Green Belt and agreed to defer the application to allow officers to further investigate the Green Belt boundary at the site.

Members considered an application for the erection of 6 no. industrial/warehouse units (Use class B1, B2, B8) (Amendment to the footprint and design from previously approved permission 05/02414/FULM), submitted by H B Raylor and Co Ltd.

Officers updated the committee that the following additional condition had been imposed on the previous permission but had been omitted by mistake in this application:

“No part of the development hereby permitted shall be occupied until the following highway works-

“The provision of a real time bus information display to the nearest outbound bus stop on Lawrence Street at its junction with James Street.”

have been carried out in accordance with a specification to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority, or alternative arrangements have been made to ensure the same.

Reason: In order to encourage employees to travel to the site by public transport in accordance with the advice contained in Planning Policy Guidance Note 13: “Transport”, and with Policy T20 of the City of York Draft Local Plan.

INFORMATIVE;

The alternative arrangements referred to in the above condition could be satisfied by the completion of a planning obligation made under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 by those having a legal interest in the application site, requiring a financial contribution to be paid towards the implementation of the highway works. The obligation should provide for a financial contribution calculated at £7 000.”

Mr Batterby, the agent for the applicant, addressed the committee in support of the item and answered Members’ questions.

Members requested the following height (HT1) condition be included on the planning permission:

“Notwithstanding the information contained on the approved plans, the height of the approved development shall not exceed 7 metres, as measured from existing ground level. Before any works commence on the site, a means of identifying the existing ground level on the site shall be agreed in writing, and any works required on site to mark that ground level accurately during the construction works shall be implemented prior to any disturbance of the existing ground level. Any such physical works or marker shall be retained at all times during the construction period.

Reason: to establish existing ground level and therefore to avoid confusion in measuring the height of the approved development, and to ensure that the approved development does not have an adverse impact on the character of the surrounding area.”