Agenda item

Erection of 3 buildings for light industrial, general industrial or storage and distribution uses on sites west of 1 Rose Avenue and north of Evans Business Centre, Rose Avenue [Rural West York]

Members considered a major full application by Mr Bottomley for the erection of three buildings for light industrial, general industrial or storage and distribution uses (class B1c, B2 and B8) on sites west of 1 Rose Avenue and north of Evans Business Centre, Rose Avenue.

Officers circulated an update, which was attached to the online agenda following the meting. This included further details on surface water drainage, further representation in support of the development and a revision to the Officer’s recommendation. Officers also reminded Members that this application was originally reported to this committee in August, when Members voted to defer the application and requested that Unit 1 be removed, in order to maintain the area as a potential site for a railway halt.  

Tony Plowman, agent for the application, explained that issues raised in relation to drainage and the footpath had now been resolved and stated that the Council no longer had control of the land. In response questions he clarified that CYC and Evans Property Group who owned the land had an agreement between 2003 and 2013 to keep the land clear for a proposed railway halt. The agreement had now ended and the proposed railway halt was generally considered unviable.

Edie Jones spoke on behalf of Nether Poppleton Parish Council and the Neighbourhood Plan Group. She stated that the Parish Council were not unsupportive of the proposal, but they wanted the land where proposed ‘Unit 1’ sat to remain open ground. This was designated as T2 and T6 land in the Draft Local Plan and was the only area that could be considered suitable for a railway halt. This would be essential once the British Sugar Site was developed and there were an additional 1200 homes in the area. Finally she suggested that Network Rail had concerns about the proposal and the safety impact of lighting on drivers.

In response to questions from Members she stated:

·        There was a critical shortage of parking in the area, approximately 100 spaces short;

·        There was no public transport to the site; and

·        There was no reference to this in the Neighbourhood Plan as it was not within their power so suggest changes to transport links.

Officers then responded to further questions from Members and stated that:

·        There were no current plans, nor funding, to develop a railway halt; and

·        The Draft Local Plan had limited weight as it had not been adopted yet. It was for Members to decide the balance.

During debate Members stated it was unfortunate that the applicant had chosen not to remove ‘Unit 1’ as the committee had previously requested, as they were supportive of the proposals for Units 2 and 3, as such units were needed for small businesses in the City. They considered the importance of future need for sustainable transport to this location. Some Members expressed that there was no current funding for a railway halt, but there was a strong view amongst the Committee that the site was safeguarded for a reason.

Resolved:  That the application be refused.

Reason:    

1.   The proposed Unit 1 was sited on land safeguarded for potential future transport schemes on the Policies Map (North) of the Local Plan Publication Draft February 2018 (Regulation 19 Consultation). Policy T2 of the Local Plan Publication Draft states that the Plan will support development proposals that improve rail access and connectivity, including but not limited to new railway stations / halts for heavy or light rail services, and capacity improvements and other enhancements (including new technology applications, where appropriate) on rail lines running into or through York. Policy T8 of the Development Control Local Plan 2005 states that the use of rail services will be promoted by allocating sites for new stations at York Business Park.

2.   The proposed development of Unit 1 was not considered to be sustainable development as it would prevent the construction of a rail halt to serve the business park, which currently experiences parking problems, and nearby strategic housing sites allocated in the 2018 Local Plan Publication Draft; namely policy SS6: British Sugar/Manor School (approx 1200 dwellings) and policy SS7: Civil Service Sports Ground (approx 266 dwellings). The loss of the site for a future rail halt would prejudice the implementation of a policy which seeks to encourage modal shift away from private motor vehicles to more use of public transport and provide for enhanced access for all members of the community to jobs, services and leisure opportunities and reduce reliance on private motorised transport for travel and hence minimise the increase in traffic levels arising from new development.

3.   The Local Plan Publication Draft 2018 has been submitted for examination and is considered to be at an advanced stage of preparation. Policy T2 was considered to be in accordance with paragraphs 102, 103 and 104 "Promoting sustainable transport" of the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2018).