Agenda and minutes

Venue: Town Hall, Scarborough

Items
No. Item

1.

Declarations of Interests pdf icon PDF 21 KB

Members are reminded of the need to consider whether they have a personal or prejudicial interest to declare in any of the items on this agenda.  If so, the nature of the interest must be declared at the start or as soon as the interest becomes apparent, of the meeting.  In addition, the attached form must be completed and passed to the Committee Administrator.  The Officers will be pleased to advise, if necessary, and any request for assistance should be made, in the first instance, to the Committee Administrator whose name appears at the end of this agenda.  Ideally, such advice should be sought before the day of the meeting so that time is available to consider any uncertainty that might arise.

Minutes:

Councillor Mrs Robinson declared a Personal and Prejudicial interest in agenda item 4, Planning Application (15/000/FL) 454 - Scalby Road Scalby because of her husband's business interests as a director of a company which was a supplier to supermarkets.

 

Councillor Zegstroo declared a Personal and Prejudicial interest in agenda item 4, Planning Application (15/000/FL) 454 - Scalby Road Scalby since his son worked for Sainsbury's supermarket.

 

Councillor Green declared a Personal and Prejudicial interest in agenda item 5, Planning Application - (14/02172/OA)-  Dove's Nest Farm & Haxby Plantation, Sneatonthorpe since he held shares in York Potash.

 

Councillor Mrs Mortimer declared a Personal and Prejudicial interest in agenda item 6, Planning Application (15/00195/FL) - Land to SE of Eskdale School, Stainsacre Lane, Whitby in her capacity as a Governor of Eskdale School.

 

Councillor Green declared a Personal and Prejudicial interest in agenda item 6, Planning Application (15/00195/FL) - Land to SE of Eskdale School, Stainsacre Lane, Whitby since he held shares in York Potash.

 

Councillor Mrs Mortimer declared a Personal and Prejudicial interest in agenda item 10, Order Under Section 257 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 - Land Off Helredale Gardens and St Peter's Road, Whitby in her capacity as Board Member of Yorkshire Coast Homes.

 

2.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 51 KB

To approve as a correct record and sign the Minutes of the meetings held on 12 February 2015 (attached) and 12 March 2015 (attached).

Additional documents:

Minutes:

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meetings held on 12 February 2015 and on 12 March 2015 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

 

3.

Public Question Time

Public questions of which due notice has been given and which are relevant to the business of the Committee.

Minutes:

The Chairman reported that no public questions had been received.

 

4.

Planning Application (15/00046/FL) - 454 Scalby Road Scalby pdf icon PDF 175 KB

To consider a:

i.              planning application for demolition of existing building and erection of Sainsbury's Local food store including access, car parking and landscaping for Sainsbury's Supermarkets Limited .

ii.            report by the Planning Services Manager (reference 15/111) attached.

 

Minutes:

The committee considered:

i.          a planning application for demolition of existing building and erection of Sainsbury's Local food store including access, car parking and landscaping for Sainsbury's Supermarkets Limited; and

ii.         a report by the Planning Services Manager (reference 15/111).

Updating the report, the planning officer advised that three further objections and one further communication of support had been received, but the issues raised were already covered in the report.  The applicant had revised the scheme in an attempt to overcome objections raised by officers, the Highway Authority and interested parties.  The amendments included the revision of parking and manoeuvring layout and the submission of an amended Transport Statement.  However, Members were informed that the Highway Authority still objected to the application because of concerns around access to the car park of the proposed store and the proximity of the site entrance to the Puffin Crossing.  These safety concerns formed the basis of the officers’ recommendation for refusal.  In accordance with the Council’s Public Speaking Scheme, Mr A Smith (on behalf of the agent) spoke in support of the application, and Ms V Aston, a neighbour, spoke against.  Members then discussed the report and asked questions.  They were advised by officers that the application constituted a 25% increase in size of building over what was permitted development.  There was limited scope to move the Puffin Crossing: according to the Highway Authority, the only way would be to incorporate a crossing within a new signalised junction.  Members voiced concerns about highway safety and traffic congestion.

RESOLVED that permission be REFUSED for the following reasons:

1.    The existing access by which vehicles associated with this proposal would leave and re-join the County Highway is unsatisfactory given that its shared status with lack of a clear route to the various facilities it serves would lead to conflicts in traffic movements, particularly when considering the envisaged high intensification of use arising from this proposal, resulting in an interference with the free-flow of traffic on the County Highway.

 

2.    The proposed access to the development would interfere with the free flow of traffic on the County Highway with consequent danger to highway users by virtue of its proximity to the pedestrian crossing facility which is less than ideally placed, by virtue of its position immediately adjacent to the access to the site. Approval of the proposals and the consequent intensification in use of the access, will increase the number of drivers who will be unable to see the crossing signal and the use of the pedestrian crossing, with consequent danger to pedestrians using the crossing.

 

3.    Section 3, Paragraph 32 of the National Planning Policy Framework which states that "Development should only be prevented or refused on transport grounds where the residual cumulative impacts of development are severe." For the reasons given above, it is considered that the cumulative impacts arising from this development would be severe and cause both inconvenience and a danger to users of the highway, including pedestrians using the existing  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

5.

Planning Application - (14/02172/OA)- Dove's Nest Farm & Haxby Plantation, Sneatonthorpe pdf icon PDF 110 KB

To consider a:

i.              To consider an application in respect of winning and working of polyhalite by underground methods including the construction of a minehead (NYM/2014/0676/MEIA), Dove’s Nest Farm & Haxby Plantation, Sneatonthorpe.

ii.            report by the Planning Services Manager (reference 15/115) attached.

Minutes:

The committee considered:

i.          an application in respect of mining and working of polyhalite by underground methods including the construction of a minehead (NYM/2014/0676/MEIA), Dove’s Nest Farm & Haxby Plantation, Sneatonthorpe; and

ii.         a report by the Planning Services Manager (reference 15/115).

Members were reminded that this application had come before the committee as a constituent local planning authority and statutory consultee for that part of the proposal which lay within the National Park; that is, the mine head, part of the transportation tunnel and one of the three associated ventilation shafts / secondary tunnel access points.  Members discussed the report, endorsing the conclusions outlined in section 6 of the report, and adding the following comments:

·         Concern at HGV movements during the construction phase 24 hours a day and the impact on tourism and residents

·         Concern at the impact of the proposals on the road system in Whitby which already struggles with congestion

·         Concern at the illumination of the development site 24 hours a day

·         Concern at the impact of the increased traffic arising from the development on noise and air quality

·         Note the Major Development Test and that the National Park Authority should assess the need for the development, whilst recognising its overwhelming economic benefits and international importance

RESOLVED that:

(i)               The committee supports this proposal in principle, emphasising the economic benefits of this proposal for the whole Scarborough Borough whether inside and outside of the National Park;

(ii)             In addition to the technical constraints of the alternative sites, the committee considers that the proposed site at Dove’s Nest is preferable in terms of less visual and landscape impact and much less impact on residential amenity than those sites; and,

(iii)            the observations contained within this report, and summarised in the Conclusion, along with the above additional comments made by committee be forwarded to the North York Moors National Park Authority as the committee’s response to the consultation on this planning application (subject to the final approval by the Chair and Vice-Chair), with a copy of the full report appended.

 

(In accordance with his declaration under Minute 1, Councillor Green left the meeting during the debate and determination of the above item.)

 

6.

Planning Application (15/00195/FL) - Land to SE of Eskdale School, Stainsacre Lane, Whitby pdf icon PDF 250 KB

To consider a:

i.              planning application for creation of temporary construction workers village comprising 1 and 2 storey accommodation blocks, to include a park and ride facility with associated landscaping and highway access works, for York Potash Ltd to SE of Eskdale School, Stainsacre Lane, Whitby, North Yorkshire.

ii.            report by the Planning Services Manager (reference 15/118) attached.

Minutes:

The committee considered:

i.          a planning application for creation of temporary construction workers village comprising 1 and 2 storey accommodation blocks, to include a park and ride facility with associated landscaping and highway access works, for York Potash Ltd to SE of Eskdale School, Stainsacre Lane, Whitby, North Yorkshire; and

ii.         a report by the Planning Services Manager (reference 15/118).

Updating the report, the planning officer advised that Yorkshire Water had recommended a number of conditions covering details of the means of ensuring that access was properly maintained to the adjacent Waste Water Treatment Works, and that the details of surface water and foul drainage were submitted for approval.  The applicant had asked if amended wording could be considered in relation to the condition over access; therefore the planning officer asked for delegated powers to agree amended wording with Yorkshire Water’s input, if the application was permitted.  In respect of the Drainage Engineer’s concerns about the site’s ability to support areas of permeable surfacing for the proposed surface water drainage system, Members were informed that the initial geotechnical surveys had indicated that the required permeability was possible, but that further investigations were needed.  If permeability were found to be an issue then enlarged capacity would be required within the underground attenuation tanks.  The officer confirmed that the Environment Agency had recommended a condition restricting the rate of surface water discharge and the use of trapped gullies to ensure the risk of pollution of the water environment is minimised.  In respect of archaeology, the geophysical survey had not detected any anomalies of archaeological potential within the survey area. The applicant had commented that overall, the results of this survey pointed to the site in all likelihood being fairly, if not wholly, devoid of ‘archaeological’ remains.  The planning officer’s view was that the geophysical survey work had not detected any potential archaeological remains that should be investigated before a decision was made. However, as a precaution, officers had agreed with the applicant that a condition requiring a written scheme of archaeological investigation should be imposed on any grant of planning permission, most likely with a view to ensuring a watching brief of excavation works during the construction phase.  This was recommended unless on the advice of the County Archaeologist it was determined that no further archaeological survey work was warranted.  In accordance with the Council’s Public Speaking Scheme, Mr G Edmunds (on behalf of the applicant) spoke in support of the application.  Local ward Councillor Tina Davy then addressed the committee conveying residents’ concerns about traffic movements, noise, light pollution, and the impact on air quality, arising from the 24 hour operation of the site.  Councillor Davy asked to what extent the use of renewables had been considered for the site, why more local people could not undertake the specialist roles required in the development of the mine, and could the Portakabins be made to look more attractive.  In response, the planning officer advised that he was comfortable with the applicant’s  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

7.

Planning Application (14/02429/FL) - Land South of, Mickleby Drive, Whitby pdf icon PDF 177 KB

To consider a:

i.              planning application for clearing of Scrub Land and the construction of two detached dwellings with access arrangements across Stakesby Vale Beck for LAUSAU Ltd, land South of Mickleby Drive, Whitby, North Yorkshire, YO21 3UD.

ii.            report by the Planning Services Manager (reference 15/119) attached.

Minutes:

The committee considered:

i.          planning application for clearing of scrub land and the construction of two detached dwellings with access arrangements across Stakesby Vale Beck for LAUSAU Ltd, land South of Mickleby Drive, Whitby, North Yorkshire, YO21 3UD; and

ii.         a report by the Planning Services Manager (reference 15/119).

Updating the report, the planning officer commented on the applicant’s revised plan which specifically showed two tracks with a grassed centre strip. The applicant had confirmed that the parking/drive (south of the stream) would comprise a grass reinforcement system to form the drive and parking areas, to further reduce any impact on visual amenity.  In amending the scheme in this manner, the applicant had asked officers to review the reason for refusal.  In doing so, officers considered that no amendment was necessary.  The planning officer accepted that the visual intrusion would be reduced by the careful choice of surfacing products; however, the parked vehicles and the vehicular activity associated with the two dwellings would remain, and add to the ‘intrusive’ nature of the development that would affect amenity.  The applicant had suggested that given this was a balanced case, that officers should supply Members with a list of conditions for consideration so as to enable the committee to consider whether the scheme would be acceptable, on balance having consideration to such conditions.  The applicant had been advised that this was not usual practice, but that conditions could be discussed should Members feel this would be helpful in terms of their consideration of the scheme.  Officers reminded Members that a number of possible conditions had been mentioned in the report in the event of committee being minded to approve the scheme. The planning officer reported further that the applicant had argued that the committee report misdirected the committee in respect of the public open space to the north of the watercourse which had only ever been the subject of an informal understanding between the parties, rather than a formal agreement, and that any such informal understanding could be treated as terminated in the event of refusal. Hence the applicant would proceed to fence in all the land in their ownership.  In short, the officer advised that the applicant contended that all the land shown within the blue lines on the application plan was private land, with a public right of way passing through it.  If refused, the applicant intended to enclose the land during the resubmission application period. This was to enable public commentators to remark in the public consultation period of the resubmission on the visual intrusiveness created by the enclosure which would remain permanent in the event of not obtaining the grant of planning permission in the future. They had already engaged contractors. Following this, in October the site would be cleared, so that public commentators could remark on the clearance in the public comments that the Inspector would consider.  The Inspector would be able to see the enclosed and cleared site during the appeal proceedings.  At this stage,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

8.

Planning Application (14/00939/OL) - Peasholm Gap, Northstead, Scarborough pdf icon PDF 286 KB

To consider:

i.              planning application for demolition of existing structures on site followed by the erection of a mixed use development comprising multiplex cinema, A1/A3/A4/A5 commercial units and residential apartments along with multi-storey decked car park and associated works for Benchmark Leisure Limited, Peasholm Gap, Northstead, Scarborough, YO12 7TN.

ii.            report by the Planning Services Manager (reference 15/62) attached.

Minutes:

The committee considered:

i.          a planning application for demolition of existing structures on site followed by the erection of a mixed use development comprising multiplex cinema, A1/A3/A4/A5 commercial units and residential apartments along with multi-storey decked car park and associated works for Benchmark Leisure Limited, Peasholm Gap, Northstead, Scarborough, YO12 7TN; and

ii.         a report by the Planning Services Manager (reference 15/62).

Updating the report, the planning officer advised that he had received illustrative and parameter plans which showed how the scheme could accommodate deliveries to commercial units from the rear while providing satisfactory headroom and ensure an acceptable relationship with neighbouring Kepwick House.  He also reported the receipt of further comments on the application.  The North Street Development Team objected to the application citing that there had been no pre-application community engagement, the proposal was in contradiction of Government policy, the National Planning Policy Framework, and a condition on the outline planning permission granted in 2004 excluded cinema use from the range of uses permissible at the Sands.  Further, the NSDT regarded the cinema as another attempt at shoring up The Sands development to the detriment of the North Street Development with its own cinema anchor, put forward and approved by the planning committee in 2008.  Since 2008, they alleged that the release of the car park site had been withheld, thus giving preference to the North Bay proposals.  Concern was also raised at the delay in issuing the draft section 106 for the North Street site on the application to renew this permission.  The NSDT believed that North Street was still the most appropriate location for a multiplex cinema in Scarborough town centre, otherwise the committee would not have approved the North Street application in the first place. The company was surprised that the Council could not see the benefit of such a development in the centre of town.  A Mr Hutchison of Cornelian Drive maintained that the site was a south facing sun trap suitable for an outdoor pool or similar attraction. A cinema was a 'dead' building for most of the day and a waste of such a premium site particularly when an alternative town centre location was available.  Mr David Humphries of the North Bay Railway Group had no objection to the development on the former Atlantis site or with a remodelled junction on Burniston Road, but did oppose the proposed road layout as it reduced the number of car park spaces in the Northstead Lower Car Park, which was used by the North Bay Railway and other businesses.  In summarising the report, the planning officer referred to the assessment of other possible town centre or edge of centre sites within the context of the NPPF and the sequential test. The position on the sequential  test was finely balanced with regard to North Street and to lesser extent Dean Road, but even if Members concluded that the Sands site did not satisfy the sequential test, there were other material factors which should be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

9.

Planning Application (15/00354/FL) - 35-37 Roscoe Street, Scarborough pdf icon PDF 148 KB

To consider:

i.              a planning application for demolition of existing building and construction of new building to house 6 new 2 bedroomed self-contained flats for Mr Anthony Dobson, 35 – 37 Roscoe Street, Scarborough, North Yorkshire, YO12 7BX

ii.            a report by the Planning Services Manager (reference 15/92)  attached.

Minutes:

The committee considered:

i.          a planning application for demolition of existing building and construction of new building to house 6 new 2 bedroomed self-contained flats for Mr Anthony Dobson, 35 – 37 Roscoe Street, Scarborough, North Yorkshire, YO12 7BX; and

ii.         a report by the Planning Services Manager (reference 15/92).

In response to a Member’s query, the planning officer confirmed that the report should have considered Policy I4 and the loss of an employment site arising from the proposals.  The officers’ view was that the benefits of the scheme outweighed the loss of employment, and in that location a residential use was more appropriate than the potential use of the site by a B2 industrial use that might be more impacting on neighbours than the current occupier. 

RESOLVED that permission be GRANTED, subject to the following condition(s)

1 The development hereby granted shall be carried out in strict accordance with the details received on the 30 March 2015 unless any amendment is first approved by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt.

2 Before the commencement of the development above foundation level, a schedule of external materials of construction shall be submitted to and be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Samples shall be provided as may be required by the Local Planning Authority of the materials in the schedule and the use of such samples shall be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and the development shall be carried out in these unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of the visual appearance of the development and the streetscene in accordance with Policy E12 of the Scarborough Borough Local Plan.

3 Hours of construction shall be limited to 0700-1800 Monday to Friday, 0800-1300 on Saturdays with no work allowed on Sundays and Bank Holidays.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity in accordance with Policy H10 of the Scarborough Borough Local Plan.

Note

All machinery should be properly silenced in compliance with BS5228 and

adequate measures taken to suppress dust.

4 The lower half of the first and second floor bedroom windows on the rear of the development shall be obscurely glazed amd thereafter so maintained unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of the protection of residential amenity in accordance with Policy H10 of the Scarborough Borough Local Plan.

Note

Certain so called 'privacy' glass does not provide sufficient levels of obscuration to conform with this condition. The pattern/texture shall be of a density to ensure that no objects or persons positioned on either side of the glazing are readily distinguishable.

Informative

The developer is advised that the existing dropped kerb is to be restored prior to the commencement of the development. These works shall be carried out in accordance with details which are to be first approved in writing by the Highway Authority. No new access shall be created without the prior written approval  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

10.

Order Under Section 257 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 - Land Off Helredale Gardens and St Peter's Road, Whitby pdf icon PDF 54 KB

To consider:

i.              orders under section 257 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 relating to public paths at Helredale Road and St Peters Road, Whitby, North Yorkshire for Yorkshire Coast Homes.

ii.            report by the Planning Services manager (reference 15/117) attached.

Minutes:

The committee considered:

i.          orders under section 257 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 relating to public paths at Helredale Road and St Peters Road, Whitby, North Yorkshire for Yorkshire Coast Homes; and

ii.         a report by the Planning Services Manager (reference 15/117).

RESOLVED that the making of an Order be APPROVED and that Officers of the Council be given delegated authority to confirm the Order following the expiry of a 28 day consultation period, subject to the process set out in Section 6.0 of the report.

 

(In accordance with her declarations under Minute 1, Councillor Mrs Mortimer left the meeting during the debate and determination of the above item.  Councillor Mrs Clegg took the Chair during Councillor Mrs Mortimer’s absence)

 

11.

Planning Appeals pdf icon PDF 119 KB

To consider a report by the Planning Services Manager (reference 15/110) attached.

Minutes:

The committee considered a report by the Planning Services Manager (reference 15/110) in respect of current planning appeals.

RESOLVED that:

(i)            the report be received; and

(ii)          progress with current appeals and recent appeal decisions be noted.