Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Robert Packham, Liz Casling and Richard Musgrave.

Councillor Stephanie Duckett was in attendance at the meeting as a substitute for Councillor Packham.

Councillor Debbie White was in attendance at the meeting as a substitute for Councillor Musgrave.

Councillor David Buckle was in attendance at the meeting as a substitute for Councillor Casling.

A copy of the Register of Interest for each Selby District Councillor is available for inspection at www.selby.gov.uk.

Councillors should declare to the meeting any disclosable pecuniary interest in any item of business on this agenda which is not already entered in their Register of Interests.

Councillors should leave the meeting and take no part in the consideration, discussion or vote on any matter in which they have a disclosable pecuniary interest.

Councillors should also declare any other interests. Having made the declaration, provided the other interest is not a disclosable pecuniary interest, the Councillor may stay in the meeting, speak and vote on that item of business.

If in doubt, Councillors are advised to seek advice from the Monitoring Officer.

There were no disclosures of interest.

The Chair welcomed a number of new Planning Officers to the meeting. He also thanked the Principal Planning Officer, Andrew Martin, and the Senior Solicitor, Kelly Dawson, for their contributions to the work of the committees, as this was their last committee.

The Chair also informed the Committee that an officer update note had been circulated.

The Committee noted that the order of the agenda had been adjusted to reflect the number of public speakers registered in relation to each application. The order of business would therefore be as follows:

1.     2018/0059/FUL – The Orchard, Garman Carr Lane, Wistow

2.     2018/0541/COU – Unit 4, Swordfish Way, Sherburn in Elmet

3.     2016/1077/FULM – Staynor Hall, Bawtry Road, Selby

4.     2017/1295/FULM – Turnhead Farm, York Road, Barlby

5.     2018/0260/FUL - Low Farm, Low Farm Road, Bolton Percy

6.     2018/0650/FUL – Land adjacent to 4 Sir Johns Lane, Sherburn in Elmet

7.     2018/0281/COU – Hillam and Monk Fryston Cricket Club, Chapel Street, Hillam

The Planning Committee is asked to agree to the suspension of Council Procedure Rules 15.1 and 15.6(a) for the committee meeting. This facilitates an open debate within the committee on the planning merits of the application without the need to have a proposal or amendment moved and seconded first. Councillors are reminded that at the end of the debate the Chair will ask for a proposal to be moved and seconded. Any alternative motion to this which is proposed and seconded will be considered as an amendment. Councillors who wish to propose a motion against the recommendations of the officers should ensure that they give valid planning reasons for doing so.

The Committee considered the suspension of Council Procedure Rules 15.1 and 15.6 (a) to allow for a more effective discussion when considering planning applications.

RESOLVED:

To suspend Council Procedure Rules 15.1 and 15.6 (a) for the duration of the meeting.

To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on 11 July 2018.

The Committee considered the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on 11 July 2018.

RESOLVED:

To approve the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on 11 July 2018 for signing by the Chairman.

The Committee considered the following applications:

Application: 2018/0059/FUL

Location: The Orchard, Garman Carr Lane, Wistow

Proposal: Erect extension to existing outbuilding (retrospective) in association with change of use from dwelling house C3b (6 residents) to Care Home C2 (8 residents)

The Principal Planning Officer presented the application which had been brought to committee becauseit was a minor application where 10 or more letters of representation had been received, which in the view of a Director, raised material planning considerations, and where officers would otherwise determine the application contrary to these representations.

Members noted that the application was to erect an extension to an existing outbuilding (retrospective) in association with change of use from dwelling house C3b (6 residents) to Care Home C2 (8 residents).

It was queried by Members whether, if the application was not approved by the committee, the reversion back to the current position (as a residential dwelling house that provided care for six residents) would include the extension to the existing outbuilding, which had already taken place. Officers confirmed that this would need to be investigated further.

John Hargreaves, objector, spoke in objection to the application.

Charles Clarke, Parish Council representative, spoke in objection to the application.

Eric Telford, agent, spoke in support of the application.

The Committee noted the July 2015 appeal decision from the Planning Inspectorate, which had been appended to the report, for a similar scheme in South Milford. The appeal had been allowed and costs awarded against Selby District Council.

Members agreed that there were no valid planning reasons why the application should be refused.

It was proposed and seconded that the application be approved.

RESOLVED:

To APPROVE the application subject to the conditions set out in paragraph 6 of the report.

Application: 2018/0541/COU

Location: Unit 4, Swordfish Way, Sherburn in Elmet

Proposal: Proposed change of use from B1 (light industrial) to D2 (leisure)

The Planning Officer presented the application which had been brought before Planning Committee as officers considered that although the proposal was contrary to the provisions of the Development Plan, there were material considerations which would justify approving the application.

Members noted that the application was for change of use from B1 (light industrial) to D2 (leisure).

In relation to the officer update note, it was noted that the application had been brought before the Committee for the reasons set out above, but that evidence had since been received that meant the application would comply with the relevant policy; however, as the application site was Council owned it was felt that it was appropriate for the application to still go to committee.

Lianne Lazenby, applicant, spoke in support of the application.

Members considered the application further and agreed that Condition 3, restricting use of the facility to between 16.45 and 21.00 Monday to Friday, and prohibiting use at weekends or bank holidays, should be removed in its entirety.

It was proposed and seconded that the application be approved.

RESOLVED:

To APPROVE the application subject to the conditions set out in paragraph 6 of the report, apart from Condition 3, which should be removed in its entirety.

Application: 2016/1077/FULM

Location: Staynor Hall, Bawtry Road, Selby

Proposal: Erection of 37 residential dwellings with associated highways infrastructure (Phase 3F)

The Principal Planning Officer presented the application; Members noted that the application was previously considered by the Planning Committee on 6 June 2018 where it had been resolved to grant planning permission subject to no objections following the further consultation, a section 106 agreement and conditions. However, it was considered that the application should be brought before Planning Committee for clarification of the earlier resolution in respect of the affordable housing provision, which was to be provided on and off-site.

Members noted that the application was for the erection of 37 residential dwellings with associated highways infrastructure (Phase 3F).

A question relating to the adoption of roads on the Staynor Hall development was raised by Members; officers confirmed that this was a Highways matter and was not related to the application under consideration, but that it could be looked into separately.

It was proposed and seconded that the application be approved.

RESOLVED:

To APPROVE the application subject to:

i.       the conditions set out in the 6 June 2018 committee report; and

ii.      a section 106 agreement based upon the heads of terms set out in Appendix C to the 5 September 2018 committee report.

Application: 2017/1295/FUL

Location: Turnhead Farm, York Road, Barlby

Proposal: Proposed residential development (partial re-plan of approval 2013/0478/FUL) for twenty-seven dwellings with associated infrastructure

The Principal Planning Officer presented the application; Members noted that the application was to be determined by the Planning Committee as officers considered that although the environs of the site were already under development through previous consents, the development was not in accordance with the provisions of the Development Plan which brought it to Committee. It was considered that there were material considerations that would justify approving the application. 

Members noted that the application was for a proposed residential development (partial re-plan of approval 2013/0478/FUL) for twenty-seven dwellings with associated infrastructure.

In relation to the officer update note, the Committee noted that additional comments had been received from the Council’s Contracts Team Leader and County Archaeologist. Further clarification was also provided in relation to the planning obligation, amenity, surface water, landscaping and general conditions. The recommendation was also amended.

Vikki Sykes, agent, spoke in support of the application.

The Committee asked officers questions about access to the nearby allotments, and for confirmation that nature reserve areas near the western boundary of the site would remain untouched; this was confirmed by the agent during her representations to the committee.

It was proposed and seconded that the application be approved.

RESOLVED:

To APPROVE the application subject to:

i.       amended conditions 2 and 12, as set out in the Officer Update Note, and paragraph 6 of the report; and

ii.      an appropriate planning obligation to secure:

·           10% affordable housing to be provided off-site (included within the 24 units already secured as part of earlier phases of the development);

·           On and Off-Site provision of Recreational Open Space; and

·           a Waste and Recycling contribution.

Application: 2018/0260/FUL

Location: Low Farm, Low Farm Road, Bolton Percy

Proposal: Proposed erection of a four bedroom dwelling and garage

The Principal Planning Officer presented the application which had been brought before Planning Committee at the discretion of the Head of Planning due to the issues arising out of public responses. The application was deferred from the Planning Committee meeting of May 2018 due to queries raised by an objector.

Members noted that the application was for the proposed erection of a four bedroom dwelling and garage.

It was queried by the Committee if the site in question was brownfield; officers confirmed that it was former agricultural land, not brownfield, and was also outside development limits.

In relation to the officer update note, the Committee noted that officers had not been able to verify all the letters of support that had been received; three out of the 16 had been verified. Of the letters unverified, it had been pointed out that many of the letters were in similar handwriting and said the same things. Therefore, it was difficult to say that they were genuine and so little weight, if any, should have been given to these. An additional lengthy letter of objection had also been received from a local resident.

The key points raised in the letter were addressed verbally by the case officer and are summarised below:

·           Paragraph 1.3 – The wording of the paragraph was correct, the application description needed amending as the layout plans indicated a 3 bedroom dwelling with an attached garage.

·           Paragraph 4.14 – Comments made in the officer report were factually correct. The simple facts were stated and no conclusion was drawn or weight given to the previous consent for the garden use. Withholding that information would be more misleading.

·           Paragraphs 4.15 and 4.21 – These were officer’s opinion. No change to the report proposed. The objector referred to a situation where the deteriorated state of a Heritage Asset should not be taken into account if there had been deliberate neglect of the Heritage Asset. There was no evidence that a Heritage Asset had been deliberately neglected. In this case the proposal would result in the removal of an unsightly modern agricultural building which was in a poor state of repair. The building was an open fronted corrugate sheet building as seen on the photographs.

·           Paragraph 4.16 - Officer opinion – no change.

·           Paragraph 4.22 - Officer opinion – no change. Previous deferrals on the scheme were due to changing approach to applications following the 5 year land supply and various court cases. This resulted in the balance of approval being one of refusal and the applicant decided to re-design the scheme to weigh the balance more in favour. Subsequent appeal decisions and case law further tightened up the Council’s approach to development outside of settlements resulting in the balance tipping against this scheme.

·           Paragraph 4.25 - The report was correct. The Highway Authority required that the footpath and amended plans were received on  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19.5

Application: 2018/0650/FUL

Location: Land Adjacent to Number 4, Sir Johns Lane, Sherburn in Elmet

Proposal: Proposed erection of a two storey detached dwelling

The Principal Planning Officer presented the application which had been brought before committee as the application had been made by a District Councillor.

Members noted that the application was the proposed erection of a two storey detached dwelling.

The Committee asked officers a number of questions relating to the loss of views from neighbouring properties and the nearby heritage monuments.

Paul Kirkbride, objector, spoke in objection to the application.

Officers confirmed that should permission be granted, the commencement of work would depend on access to the main sewer being granted via the neighbouring property at 26 Croftway. In light of this, the Committee agreed that an additional condition should be added stating that sewerage arrangements are resolved before any work could commence on the development.

It was proposed and seconded that the application be approved.

RESOLVED:

To APPROVE the application subject to the conditions set out in paragraph 6 of the report and an additional condition that no development shall commence until a scheme for the disposal of foul drainage had been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority.

Application: 2018/0281/COU

Location: Hillam and Monk Fryston Cricket Club, Chapel Street, Hillam

Proposal: Change of use from D2 (assembly and leisure) to mixed use D1 (non-residential institution) and D2 (assembly and leisure) to provide a cricket pavilion and nursery

The Planning Officer presented the application which had been brought before Planning Committee since the development was not in accordance with the provisions of the Development Plan which brought it to Committee. It was considered that there were material considerations that would justify approving the application.

Members noted that the application was for change of use from D2 (assembly and leisure) to mixed use D1 (non-residential institution) and D2 (assembly and leisure) to provide a cricket pavilion and nursery.

The Committee asked questions relating to road passing places, the suitability of use as both cricket club and nursery and nearby flood zones. Officers confirmed that the provision of passing places was not part of the application under consideration, and it was not anticipated that there would be difficulties in using the cricket club as both nursery and club house, as the two activities would be taking place at different parts of the day and week. In relation to flooding, it was explained to Members that only part of the cricket club’s car park came under Flood Zone 2, not the building where the nursery would be.

In relation to the officer update note, the Committee noted that it provided clarification on paragraph 4.20 of the report which incorrectly referenced ‘paragraph 104’ of the 2012 NPPF. The reference should have been to paragraph 164 of the 2018 NPPF. The wording of these paragraphs was different but the message was the same, and therefore did not alter the assessment of the application.

It was proposed and seconded that the application be approved.

RESOLVED:

To APPROVE the application subject to the conditions set out in paragraph 6 of the report.