Latest planning application for the Acomb Ward

Boyes Acomb store should be open next week

Embedded image permalink

Below are the latest planning applications received by the York Council for the Acomb ward.

Full details can be found by clicking the application reference

Location: 95 Beckfield Lane York YO26 5PW

Proposal: Two storey side extension and single storey rear extension

Applicant: Mr Alan Hartley Consultation Expiry Date: 11 May 2015 Case Officer: Elizabeth Potter Expected Decision Level: DEL

———

Representations can be made in favour of, or in objection to, any application via the Planning on line web site. http://planningaccess.york.gov.uk/online-applications/

Latest Planning applications for the Westfield Ward – Front Street and Gale Lane

Below are the latest planning applications received by the York Council for the Westfield ward.

Full details can be found by clicking the application reference

Westfield

Location: Kashmir 9 Acomb Court Front Street York YO24 3BJ

Proposal: Installation of external extraction flue to rear (retrospective)

Ref No: 15/00056/FUL

Applicant: Mr Jalal Ahmed Consultation Expiry Date 23 April 2015 Case Officer: Elizabeth Potter Expected Decision Level DEL

——

Location: 103 Gale Lane York YO24 3AF

Proposal: Two storey side extension

Ref No: 15/00601/FUL

Applicant: Mr Kit Gilham Contact Mr Philip Bixby Consultation Expiry Date 23 April 2015 Case Officer: Carolyn Howarth Expected Decision Level DEL

———

Representations can be made in favour of, or in objection to, any application via the Planning on line web site. http://planningaccess.york.gov.uk/online-applications/

The Council now no longer routinely consults neighbours by letter when an application is received.

Latest Planning applications for Acomb and Westfield Ward

Including new swimming school, British Sugar site and Boyes

Below are the latest planning applications received by the York Council for the Acomb and Westfield wards.

Full details can be found by clicking the application reference

Acomb

Location: Unit 3 Rose Centre Rose Avenue Nether Poppleton York

Proposal: Use as a swimming school

Ref No: 15/00313/FUL

Applicant: Miss Donna Kettlewell Consultation Expiry Date: 20 April 2015 Case Officer: Victoria Bell Expected Decision Level: DEL

———

Location: British Sugar Corporation Ltd Plantation Drive York YO26 6XF

Proposal: Construction of development platform, engineering works and remediation and reclamation of site (duplicate application)

Ref No: 15/00523/FULM

Applicant: British Sugar Contact: Mr Neil Jones Consultation Expiry Date: 22 April 2015 Case Officer: Jonathan Kenyon Expected Decision Level:

——————

Location: British Sugar Corporation Ltd Plantation Drive York YO26 6XF

Proposal: Outline application for the development of the site comprising up to 1,100 residential units, community uses (D1/D2) and new public open space with details of access (to include new access points at Millfield Lane and Boroughbridge Road and a new link road, crossing the Former Manor School Site) and demolition of the Former Manor School buildings (duplicate application)

Ref No: 15/00524/OUTM

Applicant: British Sugar Contact: Mr Neil Jones Consultation Expiry Date: 22 April 2015 Case Officer: Jonathan Kenyon Expected Decision Level: COMP

———————

Location: 166 Beckfield Lane York YO26 5QT

Proposal: Two storey side and single storey rear extensions and dormer to rear

Ref No: 15/00551/FUL

Applicant: Mr Tom Hughes Contact: Mr Andy Sykes Consultation Expiry Date: 20 April 2015 Case Officer: Carolyn Howarth Expected Decision Level: DEL

————–

Westfield

Location: 11 Front Street York YO24 3BW

Proposal: Display of non-illuminated projecting sign and hoarding sign

Ref No: 15/00511/ADV

Applicant: W Boyes & Co Ltd Contact R Peter Belt & Associates Consultation Expiry Date 20 April 2015 Case Officer: Victoria Bell Expected Decision Level DEL

——–

Location: 7 Foxwood Lane York YO24 3LH

Proposal: Crown lift to 6m Sycamore Tree protected by Tree Preservation Order No.:3

Ref No: 15/00611/TPO

Applicant: Emma Wilks Contact Mr Tom Kitchen Consultation Expiry Date 20 April 2015 Case Officer: Esther Priestley Expected Decision Level

————-

Location: 34 Slessor Road York YO24 3JL

Proposal: Reduce, thin and lift Oak tree protected by Tree Preservation Order No.: CYC132

Ref No: 15/00620/TPO

Applicant: Owner/ Occupier Contact Mr Tom Kitchen Consultation Expiry Date 20 April 2015 Case Officer: Esther Priestley Expected Decision Level

—————————

Representations can be made in favour of, or in objection to, any application via the Planning on line web site. http://planningaccess.york.gov.uk/online-applications/

The Council now no longer routinely consults neighbours by letter when an application is received.

Housing numbers still a guessing game

The final York Council meeting last week approved a Tory motion covering the vexed question of how much land should be reserved for house building over the next 20 years.

There have been many different house building predictions floated over the last four years.

The final decision of the Liberal Democrat led Council was to approve a Council Plan allocating space for 575 additional homes a year. These would all have been built on sites which either already had planning permission or on “brownfield” previously developed sites. The plan assumed that 10% of sites would be “windfalls” – sites like the former Press building which unexpectedly became available for residential development.

That Plan was later jettisoned by a new Labour administration that by 2012 had come up with a figure of between 1200 and 1400 homes per year. This was far beyond the natural growth of the City (homes for existing York residents) with 80% of the 40,000 new homes likely to be occupied by inward migrants.

Most of the homes were to have been built on Green Belt land.

It led to a public outcry with residents launching an “Our City, not Big City” campaign.

Eventually in October 2014 the Labour Leadership was forced to resign and their Draft Local Plan numbers were abandoned.

However the new Council to be elected on May 7^th will need to adopt a new Local Plan. With the latest ONS figures painting a very different picture of housing need in the City, the Conservatives were right to say that much lower house building numbers were now justified.

However their web site paints a confused picture.

click to enlarge

On it they talk about a need to build 830 additional homes per year. That amounts to 16,600 additional houses during the next 20 years, and means the City would expand in size by 21% by 2035. Over 50% of the new homes would be likely to be occupied by inward migrants.

It appears that some Councillors have misunderstood the latest ONS population projections.

The latest figures say that York would have a natural population growth of 19,000 people between 2014 and 2030. This generates a demand for 540 extra homes each year.

Anything above that figure caters for (in many peoples view unsustainable) economic growth

So it looks like the Tories are now also planning a “Big City” growth plan. Inevitably this would mean building on large parts of the Green Belt.

NB Over 50% of new planning permissions are currently being given for “windfall sites” All are “brownfield”

On average, over the last three years, 382 new homes per year have been built in York

York Community Stadium clears another hurdle… survey boost for Knights fans

The York Planning Committee has today approved the latest plans to build a Community Stadium at Huntington.

The decision comes 5 years after an agreement was reached on how a new stadium could be funded.

The decision was expected following a recommendation for Council officials that the plans should be approved. Outline planning permission had been granted in 2012 and the full Council had, last October, accepted a new financial package which included the provision of more retail floor-space.

The new plans did, however, lead to the closure of Waterworld with the future of the Yearsley pool also placed in jeopardy.

There were surprisingly few objections from other retailers to the new plans while concerns about traffic and parking arrangements were also muted.

The plans will now be put to the Secretary of State. He could decide to “call in” the plans. With the present Parliament due to be dissolved on Monday prior to the General Election, it is likely to be June before any decision on the referral is made.

History may record that the most difficult times for the project have yet to come.

A deal with rugby is essential if the stadium asset is to be fully exploited (and business plan income achieved). There were also some awkward conditions imposed in the original planning application which have yet to be satisfied.

A solution to the Yearsley pool issue will be one of the first issues on the new Councils agenda when it too meets for the first time in June.

Then there is the ambitious 12 month building timetable. As we have said before, we doubt if a stadium could be completed for the start of the 2016 football season; but we hope we are proved to be wrong.

The less complicated project plan – agreed 5 years ago – would have been implemented by now.

We would have a stadium with both football and rugby being played there.

It remains to be seen whether the delays have been worthwhile.

Boost for Knights

In a survey undertaken by Liberal Democrats on thee west of the City residents were asked whether they agreed with following statement

” The Council should ensure that the Knights rugby team are able play matches at the new community stadium”

70% agreed
10% disagreed
20% were undecided.

Community Stadium planning application – Decision deferral likely

The agenda for the planning committee meeting which may determine the fate of York’s community stadium has been published.

No reference is made in the papers to the erroneous public notice published in The Press.

The committee are being recommended to approve the application at its meeting on 27^th March but – because of a mistake over the deadline for objections – a Council official is to be given delegated authority to formally approve the scheme on 31^st March.

It is without precedent for an official to be given this level of delegated power on such a significant scheme.

Normally, any delegated authority is required to be exercised in consultation with the spokesmen of the various groups represented on the Council.

The decision will then be referred to the Secretary of Sate to decide whether the application should be “called in”. Given the upcoming General Election, an early decision on this seems unlikely.

The scheme will remain deferred until the Highways Agency formally lifts its holding objection.

As we have said before, it seems unlikely that the plans will be determined before June. It would be very much later if the Secretary of State orders a Public Inquiry (although this seems unlikely).

Only 29 objections have been received to the proposals so far. Most relate to the impasse on the use of the Stadium by the Knights Rugby team. The Planning Committee has few powers in this regard although it must ensure that any displaced sports (in this case athletics and Rugby League) have an accessible alternative facility available to them.

Not surprisingly Vue Cinemas – who have premises at Clifton Moor – object suggesting that the proposed new cinema may represent an over-provision in the area.

The officer report says,

“The analysis of patterns of usage show that the Vue cinema at Clifton Moor has the most dominance with 55% market share for York zones 1-3 and 34% market share for the whole of the study area. It would seem likely then that, given the directly comparable format of the new proposal at Monks Cross, the greatest impact would be felt at the Vue facility. Vue has no policy protection given its out of centre location”.

The officer report is very weak in assessing the impact that an additional 5,324 sqm of retail space could have on the City centre in the long term.

The possibility that some of the units to be located under the stadium stands could also become retail outlets in the medium term also appear to have been overlooked.

The retail part of the development is clearly in conflict with the draft Local Plans published in 2011 and 2012.

It is these issues that the Secretary of State will need to consider.

The Community Stadium project is running 2 years behind the schedule agreed in 2010.

Significant planning decision for York Green Belt

Brecks Lane, Strensall planning application turned down by Secretary of State

click to download full decision

A proposal to build 102 houses on land next to Brecks Lane in Strensall has been turned down by the Secretary of State,

He “called in” the application after 9 Labour Councillors outvoted 7 Opposition Councillors to approve it at a local Planning committee meeting held on 24^th February 2014. At that time the Council still had an overall Labour majority under the leadership of Cllr Alexander.

The Minister said that the refusal was because the site was located in the Green Belt.

This has a major significance for other peripheral sites around the City which were to be taken out of the Green Belt under Labours “Big City” expansion plans.

Now the draft Local Plan – rejected by the Council in October – has received a further blow.

It is good news for threatened sites in Woodthorpe, Foxwood Lane and between Acomb and the A1237, as all are in the currently defined Green Belt

The full decision can be downloaded by clicking here

No decision will be taken on the Local Plan now until after the Council elections on May 7^th.

There are around 5000 outstanding planning permissions for new homes in York. The majority are on “brownfield” – previously developed -land.

Cllr Ann Reid the new Liberal Democrat chair of the Planning Committee commented;

Members of the City of York Council planning committee visit the land at Strensall where Linden Homes want to build 102 homes

Site inspection in 2014

“I am delighted that the Secretary of State has refused planning permission for this site. Crucially, the ruling completely undermines a number of claims made by the Labour Cabinet and further discredits their Draft Local Plan.

“The ruling recognises that the land is in the Green Belt and development should therefore be blocked in order to protect York’s character and stop unrestricted urban sprawl. It shows that even without a Local Plan in place it will not be open-season for developers in York’s countryside.

“Crucially, the ruling supports the view that preventing development on this site, and on other Green Belt sites, will encourage development of brownfield land. This is why the Liberal Democrat Group has consistently advocated a brownfield first building policy.

“The ruling says that only in very special circumstances should Green Belt land be developed. Labour have not demonstrated that those circumstances exist for this or other sites across York.

“With so many undeveloped brownfield sites it is imperative that these are developed before a further attempt is made to bulldoze the Green Belt. Labour’s housing policy is once again in tatters and a radical rethink is needed.”

Community Stadium – announcement on planning gaff expected tomorrow

Council official are expected to tell tomorrow’s York Council planning committee meeting why a Press notice, concerning the Community stadium planning application, had an incorrect deadline date for responses.

Notice published in Press

Discussion of the planning application for the stadium was scheduled to have taken place at a special Planning Committee meeting on 27th March

However the Press notice – which asked for comments on an environmental statement – does not expire until 2nd April, giving residents 21 days to respond.

It is thought that there may be an error in the Press notice return date, but any discrepancy is likely to be picked up by the opponents of the controversial proposal to include a large amount of retail floor space in the latest stadium design.

Only one plot remaining at Hob Moor “Hobstone” development

Only one of the new houses being built on the Windsor Garth development is still for sale according to developers.

The remaining property is a 2 bedroomed house which is listed at £170,000.

14 of the 55 units being built on the site are for sale (the rest will be rented by Yorkshire Housing)

The development has been criticised, not least for it’s high density levels. Originally the site was to have had only 29 units constructed. They would have been restricted to the “footprint” of the old school building.

Completion of the development later this year can’t come soon enough for existing residents living in the area.

They blame construction traffic for damage to local roads, footpaths, verges and the Moor itself.

Latest Planning applications for Acomb and Westfield Ward

Below are the latest planning applications received by the York Council for the Acomb and Westfield wards.

Full details can be found by clicking the application reference

Acomb

Location: 17 Shirley Avenue York YO26 5NJ

Proposal: Certificate of Lawful Development for use as house of multiple occupation (use class C4)

Ref No: 15/00342/CLU

Applicant: Mrs Gail Ward-Vallance Contact: Mr Raymond Barnes Consultation Expiry Date: 6 April 2015 Case Officer: Elizabeth Potter Expected Decision Level: DEL

————–

Westfield

Location: 2 St Stephens Mews York YO26 5LP

Proposal: First floor rear and single storey rear extensions

Ref No: 15/00293/FUL

Applicant: Mr Mark Gibbons Consultation Expiry Date 6 April 2015 Case Officer: David Johnson Expected Decision Level DEL

———————

Location: 67 Kingsway West York YO24 4RD

Proposal: Two storey side extension

Ref No: 15/00452/FUL

Applicant: Mr Tony Hadfield Consultation Expiry Date 6 April 2015 Case Officer: Paul Edwards Expected Decision Level DEL

—————————

Representations can be made in favour of, or in objection to, any application via the Planning on line web site. http://planningaccess.york.gov.uk/online-applications/

The Council now no longer routinely consults neighbours by letter when an application is received.

« Previous
1
…
61
62
63
64
65
…
85
Next »