Agenda and minutes

An apology for absence was received from Councillors L Casling and D Peart. Councillor C Pearson was in attendance as a substitute for Councillor L 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.

Councillors J Cattanach, J Deans and I Chilvers all declared a non-pecuniary interest in agenda item 6.3 – 2018/0673/OUTM – Leeds East Airport, as that they had all received representations in relation to the application but had expressed no opinions on the scheme and would consider it with an open mind.

Councillor R Musgrave also declared a non-pecuniary interest in agenda item 6.3 – 2018/0673/OUTM – Leeds East Airport, as the application was within his ward. Councillor Musgrave explained that he had attended Parish Council meetings on the matter and had received representations regarding the scheme, but that he would be keeping an open mind on the application.

Councillor P Welch declared a non-pecuniary interest in agenda item 6.1 – 2018/1122/REMM – Morello Garth, Park Lane, Barlow, Selby as he had received representations in relation to the application but had expressed no opinion on the scheme and would consider it with an open mind.

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

Members noted that application 6.2 – 2018/0673/OUTM – Gale Common Moto Park had been withdrawn by the applicant and therefore from the agenda and would not be considered at the meeting today.

The Committee noted that the rest of the business of the meeting would be as set out in the agenda.

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 20 March 2019; these will be circulated separately to the agenda.

The Committee noted that the minutes of the meeting held on 20 March 2019 were not yet finalised and therefore had not been circulated; as such, they would be considered at the next meeting of the Committee.

The Planning Committee considered the following applications:

Application: 2018/1122/REMM

Location: Morello Garth, Park Lane, Barlow, Selby

Proposal: Reserved matters application including appearance, landscaping, layout and scale of approval 2015/0775/OUT Outline planning permission for residential development including access (all other matters reserved for future consideration)

The Senior Planning Officer presented the application which had been brought to Planning Committee as at least 10 letters of representation had been received which raised material planning considerations and Officers would otherwise determine the application contrary to these representations. 

The Committee noted that it was a reserved matters application including appearance, landscaping, layout and scale of approval 2015/0775/OUT Outline planning permission for residential development including access (all other matters reserved for future consideration).

Members queried a number of matters with the Senior Planning Officer, including access arrangements agreed at the outline application stage, association between Alfa Homes Ltd and Barclay-De Vere Homes, the resolution of discrepancies of boundary lines on plans originally submitted with the application, concerns around highways matters such as vehicle movements in the village, especially past the school and down narrow lanes, and the agreement of a design and maintenance plan of the landscaping before the commencement of development.

Councillor Tim Thrall, Chair of Barlow Parish Council, spoke in objection to the application.

Tessa Fletcher, agent, spoke in support of the application.

Members considered the application in full and agreed that the development was in a sustainable location and that the principle of development on the site had been established in 2015 following approval of the original outline application.

It was proposed and seconded that the application be approved.

RESOLVED:

To GRANT the application subject to the conditions set out at paragraph 6 of the report.

Application: 2018/0673/OUTM

Location: Leeds East Airport, Busk Lane, Church Fenton

Proposal: Hybrid application for (1) Full planning permission for the erection of a building for creative, digital and media use and associated works, including parking, servicing and access; and permanent change of use of existing buildings to commercial TV and film studios and associated services and activities; and (2) Outline planning permission, with means of access to be considered, for the development of a creative, digital and media industries employment park and film studios (including A1, A3, D1 and C1 use class buildings), open space, landscaping, car parking and ancillary works

The Principal Planning Officer presented the application which had been brought to Planning Committee as it was a departure from the Development Plan and there were material considerations which would support the recommendation for approval.

The Committee noted that it was a hybrid application for (1) Full planning permission for the erection of a building for creative, digital and media use and associated works, including parking, servicing and access; and permanent change of use of existing buildings to commercial TV and film studios and associated services and activities; and (2) Outline planning permission, with means of access to be considered, for the development of a creative, digital and media industries employment park and film studios (including A1, A3, D1 and C1 use class buildings), open space, landscaping, car parking and ancillary works.

In relation to the officer update note, the Committee acknowledged that since the agenda had been published, additional information relating to Church Fenton Yorkshire Studios’ existing use and operation, the potential for the future and specific Inward Investment opportunities and learning and skills development had been received from the applicant.

Additional letters of support had also been received from the Vice Chancellor of York St John University, the Principal and Chief Executive of Selby College, the Principal and Chief Executive of York College and business who worked in the creative industries sector and who had moved to the site from smaller premises in Tadcaster and Sherburn in Elmet.

Ulleskelf Parish Council had confirmed their support for the development but reiterated concerns relating to the lack of footpaths between the village and application site. Concerns regarding the capacity of the local road network had been considered by the Highway Authority which had concluded that the impact of the development on the highway network could be mitigated where necessary.

Paragraph 4.47 of the report considered the impact of the development on the Scheduled Ancient Monument located within the site not to be significant. Officers considered that the benefits arising from the heritage asset being sensitively handled and better understood and appreciated outweighs the less than substantial harm to the significance of the designated asset. The requirements of paragraph 196 of the NPPF had therefore been satisfied.

Lastly, formatting errors in the report means that paragraphs 4.30 to 4.34 should be preceded by the heading ‘Landscape, design and visual impact’ and paragraphs 4.40 to 4.42 preceded by the heading ‘Impact  ...  view the full minutes text for item 61.2