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.

At this point in the meeting, 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 3d (Harewood Whin Landfill Site, Tinker Lane, Rufforth) as she is the Council’s representative on Yorwaste. She left the room for discussion of this item and took no part in the debate or vote.

Councillor Horton declared a personal non prejudicial interest in plans item 3e (Askham Bryan College, Askham Fields Lane, Askham Bryan) as his stepson is a student at the college.

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 5pm on Wednesday 16 March 2011. 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 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 an agricultural building for the keeping of Livestock. [Bishopthorpe Ward] [Site Visit]

Members considered a full application from Mr Kevin Linfoot for the erection of an agricultural building for the keeping of livestock.

Officers informed the Committee that the site appeared to be for an agricultural use which is appropriate development in the greenbelt and that details of the applicant’s landholding and stock had been provided. It was explained that the building required planning permission because it was within 400m of a protected building and was proposed to house livestock however in a different location it could be built under agricultural permitted development rights. They also advised that draft conditions 4 and 5 in the report duplicated each other and recommended that condition 4 be deleted.

Representations were received from a representative of Bishopthorpe Parish Council in objection to the application. He questioned the proposed use of the shed and hard standing stating that insufficient information had been provided by the applicant to confirm these details. He advised Members that due to lack of details there was not sufficient justification to confirm that this is appropriate development in the greenbelt and suggested that the application should be resubmitted with further clarification on the proposals. 

Officers clarified that the purpose of the building was to house livestock. They explained that the design had been amended to increase the hard standing to allow a greater turning area so that a rigid HGV could turn round on the site, and so that the building was high enough for vehicles to be able to drive through it.  

Members raised concerns that they had not been given sufficient information on the proposed use of the building and questioned whether there was sufficient space to house animals, store feed stuff and drive a vehicle through the building.  Members also raised concerns that the increase in size of the hard standing could impact on the soakaways.

Councillor Galvin proposed and Councillor Gilles seconded a motion to refuse the application on the basis that it was inappropriate development in this location. On being put to the vote, the motion was lost.

Members acknowledged that in its present site, the building would be well screened and that if they turned down the application, the applicant could put the building in the middle of his land and as long as this was 400m away from any building not concerned with farm, it could be built under agricultural permitted development rights.

Officers advised that if members were concerned about the building being used for agricultural purposes, a condition could be added to the permission to state that if the building ceased to be used for agricultural purposes, the building must be removed from the land. Members agreed to this condition.

RESOLVED:             That the application be approved subject to the conditions listed in the report, the deletion of existing condition 4 and the addition of the condition detailed below.

Additional Condition

Should the building cease to be used for agricultural purposes it shall be removed from the land within 6 months of the date  ...  view the full minutes text for item 54a

Dormer windows to front and rear and alterations to shopfront (revised scheme). [Mickelgate Ward]

Members considered a full application from Mr Philip Armitage for dormer windows to the front and rear and alterations to the shopfront (revised scheme)

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

REASON:                  The proposal, subject to the conditions listed in the report  would not cause undue harm to interests of acknowledged importance, with particular reference to the appearance of the building and residential amenity. As such the proposal complies with Policies GP1 and H7 of the City of York Development Control Local Plan.

Change of use from retail (use class A1) to restaurant (use class A3) as extension to Lal Quila at 17 Bishopthorpe Road. Use of first floor of 17 as managers flat. [Mickelgate Ward] [Site Visit].

Members considered a full application from Mr H Kabir for the change of use from retail (use class A1) to restaurant (use class A3) as an extension to Lal Quila at 17 Bishopthorpe Road and the use of the first floor of no 17 as a manager’s flat.

Officers advised Members that a 92 signature petition had been received from the applicant, signed by customers in support of the planning application to provide larger premises for Lal Quila stating that the restaurant had been a part of the Bishopthorpe Road community and provided a place where local people regularly meet each other. Officers drew Members attention to a revised drawing which showed changes to the internal arrangements including the take away area. Officers stated that the planning issue was the loss of the retail unit allied with the expansion of a non-daytime use adversely affecting the character and viability of the shopping area.

Representations were received from a local resident in objection to the application. She advised the committee that there was a strong feeling amongst the local population against the loss of a shop on Bishopthorpe Road. She explained that Bishopthorpe Road was a unique community of shops and in order for the shopping parade to survive, there needed to be a complete choice of shops. She pointed out that premises which change from a shop to restaurant normally remain as so and stressed the importance of premises being open during the day. She stated that when the property became vacant, more than two parties were interested in it and assured members it would not remain empty for long.

Representations  were also received from the agent on behalf of the applicant. He advised Members that Lal Quila had been trading for 20 years and approximately 80 percent of the customers were local residents. He pointed out that although planning officers had recommended refusal, no other council departments had raised objections to the application. He stated that the premises had been vacant since October 2010 and had previously been a florist. He noted that that there were alternative florists businesses within walking distance and three shops within the parade offering flower sales. He explained that the if approved, the proposals would enable the applicant to improve the facilities he is able to offer his customers including providing downstairs toilet facilities. He pointed out that this was a once in a life time opportunity to expand his business and the owner hoped to reopen for lunchtime trading and sell prepared Indian meals.

Members asked for clarification on the Micklegate Planning Panel’s response to the consultation. Officers read out the statement received from the Micklegate Planning Panel which stated that they recognised the contribution made by the Lal Quila to the area but raised concerns over the loss of a retail unit on the street.

Councillor Gunnell explained that Bishopthorpe Road was a vibrant street where traders work well together and local community groups thrive. She pointed out that there was currently  ...  view the full minutes text for item 54c

Extension of material recovery building, provision of hard standing and variation of condition 3 of Planning Permission 07/02440/FUL to allow use of building between 06.00 - 22.00 7 days a week.  [Rural West York Ward] [Site Visit]

Members considered a major full application (13 weeks) from Mr Mark Hall for the extension of a material recovery building, the provision of hard standing and variation of condition 3 of Planning Permission 07/02440/FUL to allow use of building between 06.00 – 22.00, 7 days a week.

Officers circulated a written update to Members, as follows, and read through these for the benefit of those at the meeting.

• That condition 2 be amended to delete the first plan ref HAR-PLOO-YO811-OOA as it does not reflect the current situation to date.
• The application has asked that it be pointed out that should the application be approved the facility would be open for the receipt of materials between 06.00 hours and 07.00 hours in the morning and that no processing would take place at that time.
• In terms of vehicle movements, the extended hours would not lead to an increase in the total volume of vehicle movements into and out of the site but a spreading of the existing traffic volume more evenly through the day.
• For the avoidance of doubt, the existing operating hours for the Materials Recycling Building are 07.30 to 17.30 each day.

Representations were received from a gentleman who read a statement from   Rufforth with Knapton Parish Council in objection to the application. He stated that this was the fourteenth application since the original permission was granted, none of which had been rejected by the Committee. He drew Members’ and officers’ attention to some errors within the report. He stated that the Parish Council raised strong objections to the increase in operating hours which equated to an increase of 66 percent in the time when the site would be open as this showed no regard to public amenity. He asked the Committee to consider requiring a S106 application to facilitate public access for walking and cycling across the site if the application was approved. In response to a query from Members he advised the Committee that he was not personally aware of industrial noise but the main concern was the noise created by trucks reversing on the site.

Representations were also received from the agent on behalf of Yorwaste in support of the application. He stated this was a modest extension which would not give rise to additional waste. He informed Members that there was no large anticipated rise in vehicle movements, with only an additional 3 vehicles (6 movements) expected each day, but instead a redistribution of vehicle movements over a longer time period. He explained that their intention was for waste to be received on site between 6am and 10pm and for waste to be processed on site between 7am and 5.30pm. He advised the Committee that Yorwaste had responded to concerns raised by Rufforth with Knapton Parish Council and any possible errors in the report. In response to a query from Members he advised that following tests on noise levels, Yorwaste had undertaken not to operate a piece of plant machinery between 6am and 7am,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 54d

Construction of steel framed agricultural building (Beef unit) to the rear of Westfield Cottages.  [Rural West York Ward]

Members considered a major full application (13 weeks) from Mr John Mawson for the construction of steel framed agricultural building (Beef Unit) to he rear of Westfield Cottages.

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

REASON:                  The proposal, subject to the conditions listed in the report, would not cause undue harm to interests of acknowledged importance, with particular reference to openness and visual amenity of the greenbelt. As such the proposal complies with Policies GP1 and GB1of the City of York Council Development Control Local Plan (2005) and national planning policy contained within Planning Policy Guidance 2 'Green Belts' and Planning Policy Statement 7 'Sustainable Development in Rural Areas'.

Construction of childrens play area on public open space. [Westfield Ward] [Site Visit]

Members considered a full application from Miss Beth Cooper for the construction of a children’s play area on public open space.

RESOLVED:             That delegated authority be given to officers to approve the application once the neighbour notification period has expired, subject to the conditions in the report.

REASON:                  The proposal, subject to the conditions listed in the report, would not cause undue harm to interests of acknowledged importance, with particular reference to the impact on the visual amenity of the surrounding area, loss of neighbour amenity and protection of the Local Nature Reserve. As such the proposal complies with Policies GP1, GP7 and NE5a of the City of York Draft local plan (4th set of changes) approved for Development Control purposes April 2005.