Local democracy during coronavirus

During coronavirus, we've made some changes to how we're running council meetings. See our coronavirus updates for more information on meetings and decisions.

Agenda item

City of York Local Plan Further Sites Consultation.

The purpose of this report is to inform Members of on going work relating to potential Local Plan allocations. The report seeks permission to undertake public consultation on potential new sites and boundary changes on some of the sites originally identified. These are included in the proposed consultation document – City of York Local Plan – Further Sites Consultation (attached at Annex A to the report).



Members considered a report which informed them of ongoing work relating to potential Local Plan allocations and sought permission to undertake public consultation on potential new sites and boundary changes on some of the sites originally identified. The proposed consultation document was attached at Annex A.


The consultation would inform future recommendations on the portfolio of sites for inclusion in the publication draft Local Plan. This document would be subject to public consultation later in the year before being submitted to the Secretary of State for public examination.


Officers outlined the report and advised that legally the Council has to identify all sites for the plans 15 year period. Following the Local Plan Preferred Options consultation between June and July 2013, 5000 responses had been received and work on those responses had now been completed and the information uploaded to the Councils website. During the Preferred Options consultation, further information on sites was received from landowners and developers. This included the submission of new sites and further evidence on existing sites. All sites put forward were evaluated and where it was felt that sites had potential, these are included at Annex A to this report. No final decision on sites has been made at this stage and Officers are seeking permission to go out to consultation.


In terms of the comments raised by the registered speakers, Officers advised that observations on inaccuracies were welcomed. In relation to the cumulative impact on the  A59 area, any comments were welcome and it was confirmed that in relation to pressure on services and infrastructure, Officers would work in conjunction with Education and Highways Officers for the final draft of the Local Plan.


Officers outlined three technical updates to the report which were circulated to Members at the meeting. The first related to a map error on the front sheet of technical annex 2 page 157 – site 779 Land at Boroughbridge Road. The Land should be shown as falling within an area retaining rural setting as designated in the 2013 update to the Historic Character and Setting Technical Paper. The approach to the site in terms of analysis would remain the same as the site provided additional supporting evidence through the Local Plan Preferred Options Consultation and the site was re-assessed through Technical Officer Panel. The second update related to a map error on page 48 of the agenda pack (Site 11 Land at New Lane, Huntington). The map required an amendment to reflect the correct map in Technical Appendix 5 (page 24) to include the Site of Local Interest (SLI) in the South East corner of the site. This reflected the approach taken in the Local Plan Preferred Options. The final amendment was an error in the title on page 70 of the agenda paper. The name should read ‘Chowdene, Malton Road’.


An addendum on the addressing of the shortfall of sites for Gypsies, Roma and Travellers had been circulated to Members ahead of the meeting (attached to the online agenda for information). Officers advised that work had been ongoing during the week the agenda had been published and it was important to bring the addendum to the meeting. Members noted that a shortfall of sites for Gypsies, Roma and Travellers would mean the Local Plan would fail  its examination and noted the recommendations in the addendum to be put forward as part of the consultation.


In response to written submissions received from MM Planning regarding sites at Elvington Airfield and Designer Outlet, Naburn, Officers advised that the decisions made were based upon the outcomes of technical officer assessment and the evidence presented by MM Planning did not provide the grounds to change the status of the assessment or outcome.


Members had a number of comments as follows:

·        Could Councillors names remain attached to the comments they made on the preferred options document as there is no need to keep Councillors names confidential. Officers confirmed that the comments made by Councillors would not be anonymous and that the data protection issues only applied to members of the public.

·        A timetable for the Local Plan would be useful for Members. Officers confirmed that a timetable had been recently emailed to Members but the level of response to this consultation may have some impact on the workload and affect the timetable.

·        The viability of some sites. Officers confirmed that they would continue to work with developers and site owners and if it transpired that some sites may not be viable they would be looked at again.

·        In relation to covenants, Officers confirmed that if they are made aware of existing covenants which will impact on a site being available, then such sites would not be taken forward.

·        A Member suggested that the Vinery site identified by a registered speaker as having a covenant should be removed from the consultation document. The Chair suggested Officers should be given time to look into the issue first.

·        A Member pointed out that the Council has a duty under the National Planning Policy Framework to produce a sound plan and the public needs to understand that the Council has to provide sites for Gypsies, Roma and Travellers, despite objections to proposed sites.

·        A Member queried why a site on Stockton Lane had been included in the consultation document after being discounted in 2011 and also raised concerns about inconsistencies such as some sites being classed as having historic significance when other important sites have not.


Members commented that at this stage, the report was about the consultation and moving the Local Plan process forward. In response to comments made by Members on the consultation process, Officers confirmed that they would be liaising with Neighbourhood Planning Teams to encourage residents to engage with the consultation as well as using the usual consultation methods such as leaflets and the Councils website and notifying 8000 people on the database.


Resolved:           That in accordance with Option One, the Local Plan Working Group recommended Cabinet to:


(i)           approve the document attached at Annex A along with supporting information for public consultation, as amended by the addendum to the report with recommendations and establish additional factual changes raised during the Local Plan Working Group.


Reason – So that an NPPF compliant Local Plan can be progressed.


(ii)          delegate to the Director of City and Environmental Services (CES) in consultation with the Cabinet Member the making of any incidental changes to the draft document that are necessary as a result of the recommendations to Cabinet.


Reason – So that changes recommended as a result of discussions at this meeting can be made.


(iii)        delegate to the Director of CES in consultation with the Cabinet member the approval of a consultation strategy and associated documents.


Reason – To ensure that the proposed methods of consultation are satisfactory to Members.


(iv)        Delegate to the Director of CES in consultation with the Cabinet Member the approval of supporting information and  documentation to be published during public consultation.


Reason – To ensure that the proposed methods of consultation are satisfactory to Members.



Supporting documents:


Back to the top of the page