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

Councillor Wiseman declared a personal non prejudicial interest in agenda items 4 d, e, f and g (Stable Block, Chapter House Street) as she had sat on the Licensing Panel which determined an application for a premises licence at Grays Court. 

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting of the West & City Centre Area Planning Sub-Committee held on Thursday 15 July 2010 and Thursday 19 August 2010.

RESOLVED:             That the minutes of the meetings of the West and City Centre Area Planning Sub Committee held on 15 July and 19 August 2010 be approved and signed 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, in this case 5:00pm on Wednesday 15 September 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.

There were no registrations to speak under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme on general issues within the remit of the Sub-Committee.

To determine the following planning applications related to the West and City Centre Area.

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.

Erection of school building with associated parking and landscaping, construction of multi-use games area following demolition of existing school building (resubmission).  [Holgate Ward] [Site Visit].

Members considered a major full application (13 weeks) by Dr J Whiston for the erection of a school building with associated parking and landscaping and the construction of a multi-use games area following the demolition of the existing school building (resubmission).

Officers advised the Committee that the description in the report should read “erection of school building with associated parking and landscaping, construction of multi-use games area, and part demolition of the existing school building (resubmission)”. They also advised that any references in the report to “Hamilton Road” should read “Hamilton Drive” They advised Members of the need for an additional condition for a travel plan and stated  that condition 23 should be removed as the content was covered by another condition and that condition 26 be revised.

Representations were received from the Head of Our Lady’s and English Martyrs’ Federation in favour of the application. He explained that the two schools had a long history between them but a few years ago the task of recruiting new heads for both schools had proved problematic and the federation was created. He stated that the new combined school building would provide the opportunity for increased community engagement and would become a great asset to the community as well as preparing children well for their future through a sound catholic education.

Members agreed that the proposed new building was exciting, which, including outdoor classrooms and garden/allotment areas, would provide the space and environment which would enthuse children to learn.

They noted the objection from a neighbour on the grounds of overlooking from the balcony but were of the opinion that the school boundary by the beck to the property in question was high and fairly densely planted so any overlooking shouldn’t be any different than at present.

They expressed their main concern as traffic. They noted that the area was already busy at school drop off/collection times and acknowledged that with it being a catholic school it attracts children from further a field who would not necessarily be able to walk or cycle to school. However they agreed that with a travel plan and appropriate traffic regulations in the vicinity of the school, traffic problems would be no worse than at other schools.

RESOLVED:

That the application be approved subject to the conditions listed in the report, the removal of condition 23 as listed in the report and the amended and additional conditions listed below.

Amended Condition

All areas used by vehicles shall be surfaced, sealed and positively drained within the site, in accordance with a timescale to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To prevent the egress of water and loose material onto the public highway.

Additional Condition

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the School Travel Plan Framework Revision B received 9 July 2010. The submitted travel plan shall be implemented in accordance with the timescale within the travel plan. Within 12 months of occupation of the site  ...  view the full minutes text for item 21a

Erection of 3 storey building and part retention of existing building to comprise 26 bed hotel with restaurant and associated car parking to rear of 4 Monkgate.  [Guildhall Ward] [Site Visit].

Since publication of the agenda, this application has been withdrawn by the applicant and therefore will not be reported to this meeting.

Members were advised that this application, for the erection of a 3 storey building and part retention of existing building to comprise a 26 bed hotel with restaurant and associated car parking to the rear of 4 Monkgate, had been withdrawn by the applicants, S A Properties, prior to the meeting.

Temporary mooring for a residential house boat to the south of the entrance to Rowntree Park Caravan Site.  [Micklegate Ward] [Site Visit]

Members considered a full application from Mr Richard Musk for the temporary mooring for a residential house boat to the south of the entrance to Rowntree Park Caravan Site.

Representations were received from the Chairman of a regional branch of the Inland Waterways Association. He stated that he fully supported the application and advised Members that any objections to this application may be due to one cruiser close by which he described as an eyesore. However he stressed that the majority of the boats and barges were well maintained and kept in a clean condition. He raised concerns over the lack of availability of permanent moorings and asked that Members consider increasing the length of temporary moorings to take account of the fact that boat owners  may need to pay out for works to be carried out when moving to a new mooring and the associated cost of this.

Members noted the concerns raised by the speaker. Officers responded to Members queries regarding the length of temporary permissions. They confirmed that rent increases, and the potential result of being made homeless, could be a material planning consideration and therefore be accepted as very special circumstances for allowing inappropriate development in the greenbelt. In response to concerns raised about moorings changing hands, officers advised that as the City of York Council is the land owner of the river bank, Property Services have control over who moors there.

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

REASON:                  Planning permission is granted for a temporary period only while a permanent mooring location is sought in a more appropriate location and as special circumstances have been put forward, which, in addition to the requirement for a temporary consent only, outweigh the harm that would occur to the openness of the green belt and character and setting of this part of the Terry Avenue New Walk conservation area.

Conversion of coach house to provide 7no. letting bedrooms ancillary to Grays Court.[Guildhall Ward] [Site Visit]

Members considered a full application by Mr John Edwards for the conversion of a coach house to provide seven letting bedrooms ancillary to Grays Court. Members agreed to consider the application for Listed Building Consent (Minute 21e refers) for internal and external alterations in connection with the conversion alongside this application.

The Council’s Head of Design, Conservation and Sustainable Development was present at the meeting to provide additional information as needed.

Officers advised that they had received a consultation response from English Heritage who were content to defer to the specialist conservation advice provided by City of York Council. They stated that concerns with regard to the proposed service provision and the impact on the archaeological deposits had been addressed and would be confirmed through the Scheduled Monument consent process.

Representations were received from O’Neill Associates on behalf of an objector. She stated that this proposal could not be assessed in isolation from other activities taking place at Grays Court. She noted that Planning consent granted in 2006 allowed change of use to a dwelling with lettable rooms and a holiday flat however was of the opinion that this permission did not permit use of the premises as a café which was now in operation and which was used for events such as dinners, exhibitions and wedding receptions, which extend out into the garden in summer which she stated impacts adversely on adjacent residents. She stressed that an additional 7 letting bedrooms would add considerably to the disturbance and inconvenience already faced by residents as a result of current activities on site. She advised Members that she supported the principle of re-use of historic buildings to maintain their fabric but noted that this area, within York’s Central Conservation Area, had been used for residential purposes since the 15^th century. She voiced the opinion that this “unauthorised activity” needed to be investigated and controls put in place before this proposal could be determined.

Representations were also received from the applicant in favour of the application. He asked that minor details raised at this stage be dealt with by conditions. In respect of concerns raised about parking, he advised that there would be not be issue of displaced parking, as staff did not currently park on the site. He advised that parking facilities already existing would be available for use by residents of the Coach House. He stressed that both Grays Court and the Coach House must be economically viable in order for them, as owners, to be able to afford the costs of repair and maintenance of the historic buildings. He voiced the opinion that it was in the public’s interest to have Grays Court in full use and the development of the Coach House would contribute to this but without development taking place, both buildings could in future appear on English Heritage’s Buildings at Risk Register. In response to queries from Members, he confirmed that his preference was to be able to develop the Coach House as 7 letting  ...  view the full minutes text for item 21d

Internal and external alterations in connection with conversion to provide letting accommodation ancillary to Grays Court.

 [Guildhall Ward] [Site Visit]

Members considered an application for Listed Building Consent by Mr John Edwards for internal and external alterations in connection with conversion to provide letting accommodation ancillary to Grays Court. The Committee had agreed to discuss issues surrounding this application for listed building consent alongside the full application (Minute 21d refers).

RESOLVED:            

That the application be refused.

REASON:     

The proposed external alterations to the building including the size and number of rooflights, the introduction of solar panels, the erection of a porch, the vertical emphasis of new windows and doors and consequential loss of the more generously proportioned openings, and the loss of characteristic features such as the stable doors and taking-in hatches would adversely affect the utilitarian character of the building and harm the appearance of the building.  As such the proposals would not meet the objectives of policies HE4 of the Development Control Local Plan or of policies contained within Planning Policy Statement 5 "Planning for the Historic Environment".

Conversion to provide a single dwellinghouse with external alterations including porch, new rooflights and solar panels and alterations to windows and doors. [Guildhall Ward] [Site Visit]

Members considered a full application from Mr John Edwards for a conversion to provide a single dwellinghouse with external alterations including a porch, new rooflights and solar panel and alterations to windows and doors. Members had agreed to consider the application for listed building consent (Minute 21g refers) alongside this application.

The Council’s Head of Design, Conservation and Sustainable Development was present at the meeting to provide additional information if needed.

Representations were received from the applicant. He explained that the Coach House had been neglected and was currently in a poor condition and that it was important to bring it back into use. He reminded Members that planning guidance states that new uses should be found for neglected listed buildings. He raised concerns that following discussions with officers at the pre-application stage, initial comments were that the proposals were acceptable but stated that officers were now recommending refusal for reasons of parking, displacement of existing parking and storage facilities and design. He stated that if these concerns had been raised earlier they could have been dealt with through conditions.  He stated that the Coach House has infrastructure to enable it to be developed independently to Grays Court and that the proposed solar panels would not be visible from the Bar Walls. He explained that the parking area would be screened from properties with high boundary walls and dense planting, that staff parking would cease on site and that the courtyard would be available for their own personal parking. He also confirmed that there was adequate storage space in Grays Court if storage space no longer available in Coach House.

Members acknowledged that, at present, the building was in a state of disrepair and agreed that it would be beneficial to both the owner and the city if the building was brought back into use. Several Members agreed that they would be happy for the Coach House to be used a single dwellinghouse. However, they voiced concerns that some of the proposals were not in keeping with the sensitive nature of location stating that, in their opinion, it was an inappropriate design due to its proximity to a well walked part of the bar walls and other listed buildings nearby.

Councillor Horton moved and Councillor Galvin seconded a motion to give officers delegated authority to approve the application once they had come to an agreement with the applicant regarding issues around the design. On being put to the vote, the motion was lost. Members remarked that due to the importance of the site, they would rather that any decision was made by the Committee.

RESOLVED:                                    

That the application be deferred to a future meeting.

REASON:

In order that further discussion could take place between the applicant and planning officers with a view to receiving revised drawings.

Conversion of coach house to provide a single dwellinghouse. [Guildhall Ward]  [Site Visit]

Members considered  an application for Listed Building Consent for the conversion of a coach house to provide a single dwellinghouse. The Committee had agreed to consider issues surrounding this application for listed building consent alongside the full application (Minute 21f refers)

RESOLVED:

That the application be deferred to a future meeting.

REASON:

In order that further discussion could take place between the applicant and planning officers with a view to receiving revised drawings.

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 30^th June 2010, and provides a summary of the salient points from appeals determined in that period. A list of outstanding appeals as at 31^st July 2010 is also included.

Consideration was given to a report, which was also being presented to the main Planning Committee and East Area Planning Sub-Committee informing Members of the Council’s performance in relation to appeals determined by the Planning Inspectorate in the 3 month period from 1 April 2010 to 30 June 2010. The report also provided a summary of the salient points from the appeals determined in that period together with a list of outstanding appeals as at 31 July 2010.

RESOLVED:             That the report be noted.

REASON:                  To update Members on appeal decisions within the City of York Council area and informed of the planning issues surrounding each case for future reference in determining planning applications.