Agenda and draft minutes

Venue: Chief Executive's Office. View directions

Contact: Victoria Foreman  Email: vforeman@selby.gov.uk or 01757 292046

Items
No. Item

4.

Planning Applications Received pdf icon PDF 87 KB

4.1

2017/1381/FULM - Land At Viner Station, Roe Lane, Birkin, Knottingley pdf icon PDF 91 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Location:2017/1381/FULM – Land at Viner Station, Roe Lane, Birkin

Proposal: Proposed erection of a new grain store including a chemical store and roof mounted solar PV

 

The matter had been brought to the Chief Executive for a decision under urgency following consideration of the application by Planning Committee on 6th June 2018. The application had been deferred for the following reasons, as set out in the minutes of that meeting:

 

“Members felt that they required more information on the application including on the unauthorised uses of some of the buildings before they could take a decision. Some members expressed a preference for a site visit; however, it was agreed that a decision on such a visit would be taken at a later date.”

 

Following this a retrospective application, under reference 2018/0681/FULM for the Change of Use of the buildings and land from agricultural use to industrial B2 use (which included 5 Biomass Boilers for the drying and heating of woodchip) was reported to Planning Committee in December 2018 and subsequently refused permission on 6 February 2019. An appeal was been lodged against the refusal and would be the subject of a hearing in summer 2020.

 

Officers explained that representations had been received from a third party requesting that the decision on this application be deferred for a number of reasons.

 

The Chief Executive, having considered the advice from Officers and the representation from the member of the public, agreed to defer consideration of the application to a later date in order for further legal advice to be sought.

 

RESOLVED:

 

To DEFER consideration of the application in order for further legal advice to be sought.

 

4.2

2019/0030/COU: Milford Caravan Park, Great North Road, South Milford pdf icon PDF 165 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Location: 2019/0030/COU - Milford Caravan Park, Great North Road

Proposal: Change of use of land to 12 gypsy / traveller pitches and associated works including 12 mobile homes, 12 touring caravans and 12 dayrooms

 

The matter had been brought to the Chief Executive for a decision under urgency as the proposal was contrary to the requirements of the Development Plan. However, Officers considered that there were material considerations which would support the recommendation for approval.

 

Officers presented the application to the Chief Executive who noted that the application was for a change of use of land to 12 gypsy / traveller pitches and associated works including 12 mobile homes, 12 touring caravans and 12 dayrooms.

 

Officers explained that an application for change of use of land from truck stop to use as a residential caravan site for Gypsies and Travellers was refused in July 2011. An Enforcement Notice alleging the unauthorised change of use of the land to a Gypsy caravan site was subsequently issued. Appeals against both the refusal of planning permission and the Enforcement Notice were considered at a public inquiry in early 2012. The appeals were recovered by the Secretary of State for his own determination and resulted in the Enforcement Notice being upheld, but planning permission being granted for a temporary period until 31 December 2014 for the use of the land as a residential caravan site for gypsies and travellers.

 

The Officer’s report recommended that the Chief Executive be minded to approve the application, subject to the conditions and referral to the Secretary of State. 

 

Officers explained that responses to the consultation on the application had been minimal, but with some comments received from Ledsham Parish Council around traffic volume and previous planning refusals for the site.

 

It was noted that inappropriate development in the Green Belt should not be approved, except in very special circumstances and that there were a number of issues that would require balanced consideration, including the need for Gypsy and Traveller pitches in the District, the impact on openness of the Green Belt and visual amenity. Officers suggested that additional factors could weigh in favour of the proposal, such as the potential displacement of existing households from the site therefore generating a greater need, the benefits of a settled base for the current occupants, that the existing site did not contribute positively to the landscape quality of the wider surrounding area and the relative sustainability of the site.

 

Officers considered that the very special circumstances that had been identified outweighed the substantial harm to the Green Belt such that a temporary permission only could be supported, but that the same conclusion could not be reached in respect of a permanent permission. The proposal to issue a second temporary permission was unusual, but it was believed to be appropriate by Officers in the current circumstances.

As part of the decision-making process Members were consulted on the application. Their comments were collated and presented to the Chief Executive as part of her  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.2

4.3

2019/0941/FULM: Selby District Council - Old Civic Centre, Portholme Road, Selby pdf icon PDF 433 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

NOTE: The Chief Executive and the Planning Development Manager did not take part in this part of the remote meeting, or the discussion or decision on this item.

 

Location:2019/0941/FUL – Selby District Council – Old Civic Centre, Portholme Road

Proposal: Proposed redevelopment of site to provide 154 residential units (Use Class C3), construction of new vehicular access onto Portholme Road and laying out of open space

 

The matter had been brought to the Chief Executive for a decision under urgency after being deferred on the 8April 2020 on the basis of the Officer seeking further information on urban design, open spaces, highways, S106, biodiversity and affordable housing. 

 

The application had been presented to the CEO Urgent Decision Session – Planning as Selby District Council was a landowner for part of the site. The Head of Planning who noted that the application was for the proposed redevelopment of site to provide 154 residential units (Use Class C3), construction of new vehicular access onto Portholme Road and laying out of open space.

 

Officers presented further information on the matters previously raised by the Head of Planning, as requested.

 

With regards to urban design, the general design of the scheme had not been objected to, but certain issues would require consideration, such as street trees, the interface of the development with the supermarket which was adjacent to the site through appropriate boundary treatments and the suggested provision of basement parking for the flats.

 

Additional information had been provided in the report as part of the planning statement, as well as further comments from the Urban Design Officer detailing some of the concerns that had been addressed. Officers confirmed that the concerns raised by the Head of Planning had all been addressed by condition, apart from basement parking for the flats which was considered to be unreasonable due to the type of modular housing on the site.

 

In terms of affordable housing, further negotiations had been undertaken with the applicant who had agreed to a change in tenure to provide a 50% affordable rented and 50% shared ownership split between the 18 no. units. This was felt to be a reasonable rate of affordable housing for the site when considering the viability of the scheme. Additional comments had been sought from Housing Officers who supported the changes made to the proposals.

 

The applicant had agreed to ensure no net loss of biodiversity; condition wording had been secured in relation to this, and further comments had been sought from the Ecology Officer who had raised no objections to such a condition. The current policy and legislative positions were such that this was acceptable. Officers also explained that the removal of trees on the site was necessary in order to raise levels and reduce flood risk. Permission was not required for the removal of the trees.

 

Further details had been provided in the report by Officers with regards to highways matters. The applicant had confirmed that the road layout was designed in accordance with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.3