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 disclosable pecuniary interests not included on the Register of Interests that they might have had in the business on the agenda.

Councillor King declared a personal non prejudicial interest in Agenda Item 4a) (Minute Item 20 a) refers) (Land Rear of 51-57 Fenwick Street) as the Ward Member who had registered to speak was his daughter.

Councillor Looker also declared a personal non prejudicial interest in the same item as a Cabinet Member. She clarified that the Cabinet had considered a report regarding the potential of development on a number of Council owned sites such as the one under consideration. She stated that this would not influence her decision on whether to grant permission.

No other interests were declared.

To approve and sign the minutes of the last meeting of the Area Planning Sub-Committee held on Thursday 7 August 2014.

Resolved:  That the minutes of the meeting of the Area Planning Sub-Committee held on 7 August 2014 be approved and signed by the Chair as a correct record.

At this point in the meeting members of the public who have registered their wish to speak regarding an item on the agenda or an issue within the Sub-Committee’s remit 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 Wednesday 3 September 2014 at 5.00pm.

Filming, Recording or Webcasting Meetings

Please note this meeting may be filmed and webcast or audio recorded and that includes any registered public speakers, who have given their permission.  The broadcast can be viewed at http://www.york.gov.uk/webcasts  or,if sound recorded, this will be uploaded onto the Council’s website following the meeting.

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 Officer (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/downloads/download/3130/protocol_for_webcasting_filming_and_recording_of_council_meetings

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 committee.

To determine the following planning applications:

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

Erection of 8 no. two bedroom apartments with associated car parking. [Micklegate] [Site Visit]

Members considered a full application by City of York Council for the erection of 8 no. two bedroom apartments with associated car parking.

In their update to Members Officers informed Members that;

·        The address for the application as stated on the agenda papers was incorrect- it should have read “Land to the East of 51-57 Fenwick Street”. However, legal advice given stated that this would not prejudice any decision made by Members.

·        The application site formed part of an area that was formerly in industrial use as an engineering works.

·        The application site forms part of the larger planning approval for the Clementhorpe Housing development by City of York Council which had been granted planning permission on 19 May 1977. (LPA ref. 7/00/1867/PA).

·        The planning permission in 1977 granted consent for 12 no. apartments and 4 no. houses on the current application site.

·        This part of the scheme did not proceed due to problems experienced on foundation work and the site was laid out as a grassed area. Legally therefore it was likely that there remained an extant planning permission for the development of the land and Members would have to give due weight to this fall back position balanced against the likelihood of that permission being implemented.

·        A further petition has been received with 62 signatures objecting to the proposal as it was felt that it would result in the loss of a valuable local asset, negatively impact on residents, destroy a green space, add pressure to an already built up area. They also felt that there were alternative brown field sites away from flood risk which the Council should be developing before the application site.

·        In relation to a Traffic Regulation Order, Paragraph 4.29 of the report should read £2000 and not £5000 and the final bullet point of the conclusion should be deleted.

Representations in objection were received from a local resident, Mr Wade. He informed the Committee that local residents had paid for improvements out of community funding to the open space such as tree planting, the erection of a steel fence and a light. He stated that the green space was used on a daily basis by the local community and it provided a safe place for children to play due to its close location to local houses.

Mr Wade confirmed that a community management committee had allocated money for improvements to the open space and this had been provided by the Council, on the back of suggestions from local residents.

Further representations in objection were received from a local resident Nicola Thomas. She mentioned to the Committee that a petition had been signed against development on the site. She commented that it was felt that Rowntree Park would not be a suitable alternative for the loss of the open space.

She commented that a car parking survey had been undertaken during hours when most residents were at work. Finally she felt that other sites could have been considered for development and that bat roosts  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20a

Change of use from residential dwelling (use class C3) to bed and breakfast (use class C1) with two storey rear extension (resubmission). [Dringhouses and Woodthorpe] [Site Visit]

This application was withdrawn by the applicant and as a result was not considered by Members.    

Demolition of existing toilet block and relocation of services within Roman House. Construction of wall along Tanner Row with associated landscaping and amenities (bin store and cycle store). [Micklegate] [Site Visit]

Members considered a full application from Mr Ben Pilgrim for the demolition of existing toilet block and relocation of services within Roman House and the construction of a wall along Tanner Row with associated landscaping and amenities (bin store and cycle store).

In response to a Member’s question about the use of the courtyard for parking, it was confirmed that this would an extension to current parking arrangements at Roman House, which would be developed as a residential property.

Discussion between Members took place. Some felt that the existing facility was located ‘out of the way’ for policing purposes and the new location for the public toilets would enable public observation. Others pointed out the need for maintenance and security of the services provided.

Resolved:  That the application be approved with the following additional condition;

                  6. Large scale details of the front elevation of the replacement public conveniences shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of construction and the works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

                  Reason:  In the interests of visual amenity.

Reason:  The proposed development would accord with the National Planning Policy Framework. There would be no harm to the appearance of the conservation area, no adverse effect in terms of crime and disorder and the amenity of neighbours and no loss of public facilities.

Councillor Warters raised concerns about waterlogged properties at the Burnholme Club site. An application for development on this site had been previously approved by the Committee.