Agenda and 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.

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

Councillor Reid declared a personal and prejudicial interest in Plans Item 4b (14 Copmanthorpe Lane) as she knew the parents of the contracted purchaser. She left the room and took no part in the debate.

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting of the West & City Centre Area Planning Sub-Committee held on 20 December 2007.

RESOLVED:             That the minutes of the Sub-Committee meeting held on 20 December 2007 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 working 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 nobody had registered to speak under the Council’s 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 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.

Internal alterations and repairs to the south gallery, installation of a platform lift and demolition of a suspended ceiling.  [Guildhall Ward]

Members considered a Listed Building Consent submitted by the York Museum’s Trust for internal alterations and repairs to the south gallery, installation of a platform lift and demolition of a suspended ceiling.

Officers Updated that they had now received a response from the Guildhall Planning Panel who did not have any objections in relation to the proposals.

RESOLVED:             That the application be approved subject to the conditions outlined in the report.¹

REASON:                  That, subject to the conditions set out in the report, the proposals would not cause undue harm to interests of acknowledged importance, with particular reference to the special historic interest of the listed building. As such the proposal complies with Policy HE4 of the City of York Local Plan Deposit Draft.

Erection of a two storey detached dwelling and garage (resubmission).  [Bishopthorpe Ward]

Members considered a full application submitted by Mr and Mrs M Cross for the erection of a two storey detached dwelling and garage (resubmission).

Officers updated that five further letters of objection had been received. The following points had been made in the eight letters of objections now received:

·        loss of privacy.

·        loss of outlook for dwellings on Kirkwell.

·        light pollution to dwellings in Kirkwell.

·        Frontage measurement is wider than the previously refused scheme.

·        Cars exiting the site will reverse into the road, causing potential danger to pedestrians; driveways of the dwellings opposite may be used when manoeuvring vehicles. Increase in the traffic within Kirkwell.

·        Impact on the character and amenity of the environment and would appear ‘shoehorned’ into the site, overdevelopment of a highly constrained site.

·        The proposed dwelling would create a sense of imbalance within Kirkwell that would impact negatively on the streetscene and would create a sense of enclosure within Kirkwell.

·        The proposed dwelling would cause significant loss of light and overshadowing during the afternoon and evening to several dwellings in Kirkwell.

·        The design of the dwelling would not be consistent with planning policy at local and national level, which requires that new development is of a high standard of design which respects and is compatible with its surroundings.

·        The majority of the dwellings in the area are semi-detached with a smaller footprint.

·        The site should be treated as a greenfield site as it has not previously been developed and therefore should be a presumption against its development.

·        Important break between the properties of Kirkwell and New Lane.

·        No consideration has been given to the ecological value of the site.

·        Flood risk assessment is brief and this part of the village has experienced flooding in the past.

One letter of support had been received which made the following points:

·        In line with Council policies.

·        Would not be overdevelopment of the site.

·        Adjacent properties would not be overlooked.

Objections had now been received from Bishopthorpe Parish Council as follows:

·        Would cause overlooking.

·        Cause overshadowing to 12 Kirkwell and 2 New Lane.

·        Construction is different from surrounding dwelling and does not enhance the environment.

·        Would exacerbate the problems of parking and access to Kirkwell.

·        No turning space within the site and cause manoeuvring problems within Kirkwell.

·        Site too small for building materials to be stored, no place for construction traffic.

·        Hedgerow will be broken to allow access, possibly an ancient hedgerow dating from the enclosures act.

Members asked Officers if the footprint size was different and they said that there was some ambiguity in relation to the size of the site but this proposal was approximately 10% smaller than the previous one.

Representations, in objection, were received from a local resident who lived opposite the proposed development who said that these proposals were closer to his property than the previous ones and had a longer frontage.

Representations were received in objection from Bishopthorpe Parish Council who agreed with the previous speaker. He also felt that there was cause for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 78b

Part two storey, part first floor, pitched roof side extension.  [Rural West York Ward]

Members considered a full application submitted by Mr and Mrs J Corner-Walker for a part two storey, part first floor and pitched roof side extension.

Officers confirmed that they had no update for the Sub-Committee.

Representations were received, in support, from the Applicant’s Agent who said that the proposals had been revised in accordance with Member’s comments at a previous meeting.

Members felt that the new proposals had taken on board the concerns they had raised in relation to the previous application.

RESOLVED:             That Authority to approve the application be delegated to Officers subject to the conditions outlined in the report.¹

REASON:                  That, subject to the conditions set out in the report, the proposal would not cause undue harm to interests of acknowledged importance, with particular reference to the residential amenity of neighbours, the visual amenity of the dwelling and the locality and highway safety. As such the proposal complies with Policies H7 and GP1 of the City of York Development Control Local Plan (2005); national planning guidance contained in Planning Policy Statement 1 “Delivering Sustainable Development”, and supplementary design guidance contained in the City of York’s “A guide to extensions and alterations to private dwelling houses.”