Agenda item

This matter is reported to Planning Committee following the recent submission of an appeal against non-determination to the Secretary of State by the applicant.  Members are requested to consider this report and to endorse the approach that will be presented to the Planning Inspectorate as the Council’s case at the public inquiry. 

The application is for outline consent with full details of means of access.  It proposes residential development of circa 970 dwellings with associated demolition, infrastructure works, open space, primary school, community facilities and convenience store (use class A1) on land west of Monks Cross Link Road and a country park with drainage infrastructure east of Monks Cross Link Road.  It was submitted with the intention to align the determination of the Outline application with the adoption of the Local Plan.

This matter was reported to Planning Committee following the  submission of an appeal against non-determination to the Secretary of State by the applicant.  Members were requested to consider the report and to endorse the approach to be presented to the Planning Inspectorate as the Council’s case at the public inquiry. 

The application was for outline consent with full details of means of access.  It proposed a residential development of circa 970 dwellings with associated demolition, infrastructure works, open space, primary school, community facilities and convenience store (use class A1) on land west of Monks Cross Link Road and a country park with drainage infrastructure east of Monks Cross Link Road.  It was submitted with the intention to align the determination of the Outline application with the adoption of the Local Plan.

The Head of Planning and Development Services noted a correction to paragraph 5.3 of the report. In response to questions from Members, Officers clarified that:

·        They did not have the information regarding the potential for the middle part of the development to be used for

·        The cycle access link was under the control of the applicant.

·        The planning application was submitted in 2018 and there had been issues with the Local Plan and technical issues with highways.

·        The applicant would be able to provide the information needed to show that policies HW2, HW3, HW4, HW7 and D3 had been met. It was a complicated application due to the number of complexities.

·        The master plan was indicative of whether the overall housing densities were similar to that of estates in the immediate area. The density was considered to be acceptable.

·        The applicant was proposing an area of self builds equivalent to 49 homes.

·        At present highways were not seeking to provide LTN 1/20 for the link road.

·        Presently there were no proposals for vehicular access from North Lane.

·        Highways had asked for parking provision for public open spaces on the site.

·        The council could secure a contribution for bus services but did not have agreement on this from the developers.

·        The offsite contribution for Gypsy and Traveller pitches was consistent with other decisions that had been made. These were looked at on a case by case basis.

·        There had not been any additional information regarding area 5 being designated as a play area. The detailed layout would be included as part of the reserved matters application.

·        The country park was required to mitigate the impact on Strensall Common.

·        The location of the western hedge line on the boundary was explained.

·        Regarding questions around the provision of shops, there were highways issues unresolved which would be addressed at the public inquiry.

·        A caveat for the provision of sufficient shops and amenities was not unreasonable and would continue to be requested.

·        A request for health provision would be subject to discussions with the NHS and this had not been provided as part of the application at that stage.

Public Speakers

Geoff Beacon spoke in objection to the application on the climate aspects of the development in relation to the declaration of a climate emergency. He suggested alternative uses for the land on the site.

David Gregg (Chairman of Shepherd Group Brass Band) spoke on their use of one of Portakabin's buildings adjacent to the south west boundary for Brass Band rehearsals creating noise that may encroach on new residents. He requested that a further noise assessment be carried out on Tuesdays or Fridays when the band was at its loudest. He was asked and confirmed that he would be happy to work with officers on this.

Cllr Orrell, Ward Councillor for Huntington and New Earswick Ward, spoke on behalf of Councillors for the Ward. He noted that the principle for the development was made in 2018 and t was supported by the Huntington Neighbourhood Plan. He noted the objection to the exit on North Lane and asked for stringent conditions on lorry routes and for the protection of biodiversity.

Members were then given the opportunity to ask further questions to officers who were asked and advised that they were trying to resolve whether the changes to shared pedestrian and cycleway between the two new junctions on Monks Cross Link road would be updated in line with LTN 1/20.

It was moved by Cllr Looker and seconded by Cllr Barker that the Committee endorse the conclusions of the report as recommended by officers. Members agreed to include a reference to opposition to North Lane being used as an access point and a condition regarding sustainable travel, and the provision of amenities as detailed at paragraph 5.21 of the committee report. It was clarified by officers that the policy allowed developers to provide offsite provision for Traveller pitches. A vote was taken with 13 Members in support, one against and one abstention.

The motion carried and it was therefore:

Resolved:

     i.        That Committee endorse the conclusions of the report, with the addition of a reference to opposition to North Lane being used as an access point and a condition regarding sustainable travel, and the provision of amenities as detailed at paragraph 5.21 of the committee report and that subject to the satisfactory resolution of the issues identified in 6.2 they will be presented to the Planning Inspectorate as part of the Council’s Statement of Case at the forthcoming appeal.

    ii.        That delegated authority is given to the Chief Planner, having regard to the heads of terms set out in this report, addendums and/or Planning Committee minutes, to negotiate and complete a document containing obligations pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) in order to meet the requirement of the Planning Inspector.

Reasons:

The proposed development was located within the general extent of the Green Belt; however the emerging Local Plan strategy set out that the land had been allocated for development as a strategic housing site to help meet the overall needs of the city. The 2018 Draft Plan and its evidence base regarding the proposed Green Belt boundaries and housing need were advanced and in the process of examination.  York did not have a 5 year housing land supply and therefore the proposed housing was a benefit that carried significant weight in decision making.  It was considered the lack of a 5 year housing land supply, along with the delivery of affordable housing and delivery of key infrastructure, would, subject to the satisfactory resolution of transport, highway and access issues, clearly outweigh the totality of identified harm and very special circumstances would exist in this case.  Further, it was considered to be no case for refusing the scheme on prematurity grounds.

The impact of the proposed development on the wider highway network was yet to be fully determined, following initially proposed pedestrian and cycle links in and out of the site via Garth Road and Alpha Court, to the west and south being removed from application, the trip rates adjusted to take account of improved bus provision and walking and cycling rates, were not considered to be representative of the likely trip rates for the proposed development site.  There was also a reliance on committed highway schemes (A1237 Ring Road/Strensall Junction 1, A1237/North Lane/Monks Cross Link Junction 2) to be delivered by City of York Council, however whilst these schemes were progressing, there remained a risk that the junction improvements may not be delivered, or they may take longer than anticipated.  The transport assessment had not assessed the impact of the proposed development on the existing A1237 junctions.  As such, currently the proposed development did not accord with NPPF policy regarding promoting sustainable transport, in particular paragraphs 110, 111 and 112.

[The meeting adjourned from 17:51 to 18:00]