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

Dean Court Secure Car Park To Rear of Portland Street York, [20/00505/FUL]

This application seeks permission for the erection of two storey

block of 9no. apartments with associated cycle and refuse stores. 

Part retention of existing car park. [Guildhall]


Members considered a full application from Mr B White for the

erection of a two storey block for 9 apartments with associated

cycle and refuse stores and part retention of existing car park.


Officers gave a presentation based upon the slides at pages 47 - 54 of the Agenda.


Ms June Tranmer, on behalf of the Guildhall Planning Panel, spoke in objection on the grounds that the proposed flats were too small for a suitable home for York residents, and would most likely end up as holiday flats.  There would be no room for turning vehicles around in the remaining car park.  There is a tree at the entrance to the car park that would probably be removed, with no plan to replace it.  The boundary wall would further reduce the light into the gardens of the houses in Portland Street.


In response to questions from Members, officers confirmed that:

·        The size of the units were the same as that which had been approved on their previous application in 2019.

·        Although the units were smaller than the size of dwellings recommended in the national space standards, this standard had not been incorporated in to the Local Plan for York.

·        Parking spaces would be rented out, therefore control over parking was not a conditioned.


After debate, Cllr Crawshaw moved, and Cllr Waudby seconded, that the application be approved, in accordance with the officer recommendation, with the amendment of conditions 8 and 16.  Cllrs: Baker, Crawshaw, Cullwick, Fisher, Galvin, Melly, Orrell, Perrett, Waudby and Hollyer all voted in favour of this motion and Cllr Webb voted against it.  It was therefore:


Resolved:            That the application be APPROVED, subject to the conditions listed in the report with the following two amended conditions:


Amended Condition 8 Tree Protection

Prior to any groundworks on site details of tree protection measures for the Lime tree to the south-west of the application and the tree to the south-east of the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details. 


The details shall include consideration of groundworks, including drainage, the installation of services, and the re-surfacing works.  (It is noted that the previously submitted arboriculture report recommends that to ensure tree roots are not damaged during any resurfacing, the parking area will be surfaced over a cellular confined system which is to be specified within a separate Arboricultural Method Statement).


Reason:              In the interests of good design as required by paragraph 127 of the NPPF; to avoid damage to any trees which have amenity value and make a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the conservation area.


Amended Landscaping Condition 16

The development shall not be occupied until the

species and stock size of the proposed trees (as shown on the approved plans) and the management plan for the sedum roof

have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.


The approved details and the landscaping scheme, as shown on the approved plans, shall be implemented within a period of six months of the completion of the development. 


Any trees or plants which within a period of five years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species, in perpetuity, unless alternatives are agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.


Reason:               To ensure the long term health of plants, trees and the sedum roof in support of the environmental objectives of the NPPF.



Reason for Approval:   This scheme is similar to the 2018 application which Members recommended for approval.  The difference is that 9 rather than 16 dwellings are proposed and the building would not be as long.  It is concentrated towards the end of the site and some car parking would remain.


This is an underused urban site where in principle the NPPF recommends redevelopment, in particular development for which there is demonstrable need.  The scheme would not have an adverse effect on the Central Historic Core Conservation Area and have no undue detrimental impact on neighbouring amenity.  It does not raise any highway safety issues and other technical matters can be addressed through planning conditions. 

Supporting documents:


Back to the top of the page