Previous references:           Minute 52 (2015/16)

                                                6 October 2016

 

The Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways will present a report (Document “AG”) in relation to a full planning application for alterations and extensions to existing mill buildings to create a mixture of residential and commercial uses including a crèche, spa/gym and restaurant together with 20 new build houses and 6 new build apartments and ancillary infrastructure at Greenholme Mills, Iron Row, Burley in Wharfedale – 15/03339/MAF.

 

The report explains that the application had been granted planning permission previously, in February 2016, further to consideration by this Committee, on 4 November 2015, and the completion of an associated Section 106 legal agreement. However, further to an application for a Judicial Review, a Consent Order had been made on 29 June 2016 which had the effect of quashing the permission thus necessitating its reconsideration.

 

The application had therefore been submitted to the meeting of this Committee held on 6 October 2016 when it had again resolved to approve the application. However, this decision had been made, in part, on the basis of policies set out in the emerging Local Plan Core Strategy (LPCS).  The LPCS currently has no legal effect as a consequence of a ‘Holding Direction’ which was issued by the Minister of State for Housing and Planning, under Section 21A of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 (inserted by Section 145(5) of the Housing and Planning Act 2016), on 10 October 2016.  The report now before the Committee therefore reflects the altered status of the LPCS.

 

The report also states that, as the site is within the Green Belt, the Secretary of State will have to be consulted to ensure that he is still content for the application to be determined by the Council as Local Planning Authority.

 

Recommended -

 

(1)       That the application be referred to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government under the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Consultation)(England) Direction 2009 and, subject to him deciding not to call-in the application for determination, it be approved for the reasons and subject to the conditions set out in the Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways’ technical report.

 

(2)       That the grant of planning permission be subject also to the completion of a legal planning obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, or such other lawful mechanism for securing the heads of terms as may be agreed in consultation with the City Solicitor, in respect of:

 

(i)            On-site affordable housing provision of 6 units at a level of discount on the open market value of the properties necessary to allow disposal of the properties to a Registered Social Landlord,

(ii)          The payment of a sum of £93,415 to the Local Planning Authority for the purpose of upgrading the existing educational infrastructure at Menston Primary School or Burley Oaks Primary School,

(iii)         The payment of a sum of £120,660 to the Local Planning Authority for the purpose of upgrading the existing educational infrastructure at Ilkley Grammar School,

(iv)         The payment of a sum of £21,334 to the Local Planning Authority for the purpose of improving recreational infrastructure; to be used either towards the delivery of a new Multi Use Games Area on land to the west of Iron Row or for drainage works, footpath works and fencing at Iron Row Recreation Ground and Burley Park,

(v)          On-site Recreation/Open Space Provision:

(a)  Provision of a ‘Public Plaza and Gardens’ in the area shown on the ‘Landscape Management Plan’, to be made available and accessible for public use in perpetuity in accordance with details to be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority;

(b)  Provision of the ‘Riverside Walk’ in the area shown on the ‘Landscape Management Plan’ to be made available and accessible for public use in perpetuity in accordance with details to be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority;

(c)  Approval of details and implementation of a plan for the management/maintenance of the Public Plaza and Gardens, Riverside Walk, Woodland Areas and Wildlife Meadows, as shown on the ‘Landscape Management Plan’,

 

the legal planning obligation to contain such other ancillary provisions as the Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways (after consultation with the City Solicitor) considers appropriate.

 

(John Eyles – 01274 434380)

Wharfedale

 

Previous references:           Minutes 52 (2015/16) and 50 (2016/17)

 

The Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways presented a report (Document “AG”) in relation to a full planning application for alterations and extensions to existing mill buildings to create a mixture of residential and commercial uses including a crèche, spa/gym and restaurant together with 20 new build houses and 6 new build apartments and ancillary infrastructure at Greenholme Mills, Iron Row, Burley in Wharfedale – 15/03339/MAF.

 

The report explained that the application had been granted planning permission previously, in February 2016, further to consideration by this Committee, on 4 November 2015, and the completion of an associated Section 106 legal agreement. However, further to an application for a Judicial Review, a Consent Order had been made on 29 June 2016 which had the effect of quashing the permission thus necessitating its reconsideration.

 

The application had therefore been submitted to the meeting of this Committee held on 6 October 2016 when it had again resolved to approve the application. However, this decision had been made, in part, on the basis of policies set out in the emerging Local Plan Core Strategy (LPCS).  The LPCS currently had no legal effect as a consequence of a ‘Holding Direction’ which had been issued by the Minister of State for Housing and Planning, under Section 21A of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 (inserted by Section 145(5) of the Housing and Planning Act 2016), on 10 October 2016.  The report now before the Committee therefore reflected the altered status of the LPCS.

 

The report also stated that, as the site was within the Green Belt, the Secretary of State would have to be consulted to ensure that he was still content for the application to be determined by the Council as Local Planning Authority.

 

The Assistant Director reported on the substance of additional representations received further to the publication of his written report. One, from the Parish Council, expressed support for the redevelopment of the mill. The other, in objection, raised various issues including reference to the underlying policy intentions of both Policy E4 and the wider Replacement Unitary Development Plan (RUDP) and the status of Core Strategy Policy EC4 and the evidence base underlying it in respect of the retention of employment land, and that the development should be put on hold until the Holding Direction on the Core Strategy was resolved.

 

It was noted that all Members of the Committee had previously visited the site.

 

The Assistant Director responded to questions from Members as follows:

 

·         Limited weight could be placed on the version of the Burley in Wharfedale Parish Council Neighbourhood Plan that had been available at the time the report was written.  It was understood that the process had moved forward since this time so slightly more weight could now be placed on it.  The development of this plan would not be held up by the Holding Direction.

·         The plan had been lodged with the Local Planning Authority and was currently in the process of being validated. An Independent Planning Inspector would be appointed to consider if the Plan was sound or if modification was required.  It would then be publicised and a local referendum undertaken to seek endorsement by the local community.

 

An interested party made the following comments:

 

·         The development would be an incursion into the Green Belt but, if kept to a minimum and proportionate to the amount of brownfield land, this appeared to be a good scheme.

·         Assurance was sought in relation to the maximum possible measures being undertaken to eliminate right turn manoeuvres into the site from the A65.

·         Would access to the village for people with disabilities be provided?

·         Burley in Wharfedale Parish Council supported the scheme.

 

The Assistant Director said that:

 

·         Disability access issues were a matter that was primarily addressed by Building Regulations. New development should achieve the latest standards for people with disabilities and these standards were regularly strengthened.

·         The whole of the site was within the Green Belt with the majority of it being previously developed.  There was an area of ‘greenfield’ land between Great Pasture Lane and the stone wall at the curtilage which would be landscaped and become part of residential gardens with some building on it.(Members had specifically looked at this piece of land during their previous visit to the site).

·         The access arrangements had been thoroughly considered and a condition would be included in relation to the prevention of right hand turns into the site.

 

The applicant’s agent spoke in support of the application:

 

·         It was now fifteen months since this proposal had originally been granted planning permission and this was the third time the same application had been considered by the Committee due to the Judicial Review (which was believed to have been commercially motivated) and the Holding Direction. The Council’s previous decisions had been supported by the Government Office.

·         The applicant had continued to work with officers throughout the process and supported the re-submission to the Committee in light of the delay to the Core Strategy and there being no timescale to its resolution.

·         The previous resolutions to approve the application were welcomed.

·         The failure to secure planning permission had cast uncertainty over the applicant’s plans.

·         The Mill complex comprised a number of high quality buildings with a strong connection to the village.

·         There was a risk to the applicants’ investment due to the delay and increased damage and criminality at the site.

·         The design was the same as had previously been approved.

·         The development would provide 94 valuable new homes in a high quality mixed use development on brownfield land in the Green Belt.

·         The scheme did include elements of employment use.

·         A new approach was needed to arrest the decline of the buildings.

·         The applicant was keen to connect the site to Burley and provide linkages with the river frontage.

·         Communications had been maintained with the local community and there was consistent support for the development and a strong affinity with the site.

·         The site was allocated for a mixed use development in the Neighbourhood Plan for Burley.

·         The applicant had agreed to make significant contributions to local infrastructure secured by a Section 106 legal obligation.

·         The scheme was considered to be well designed and inclusive. It would retain the character and distinctiveness of the site.

·         High quality landscaping would be included.

·         The scheme would make a positive contribution to the Green Belt by arresting the dereliction of the mill.

·         It would also reduce the pressure to build housing on other greenfield/Green Belt sites.

·         The scheme would make a contribution to community cohesion.

·         Continued uncertainty around the application was a significant planning risk.

 

Members made the following comments:

 

·         The application was before the Committee again due to a technicality.

·         It had been given unanimous support previously.

·         A lengthy site visit had been undertaken on the previous occasion.

·         This was a good scheme and the officer’s recommendation was supported.

·         There were concerns in respect of damage and anti-social behaviour affecting the site.

·         This would retain a magnificent building.

·         The local community had expressed support for the proposals.

·         It was hoped that the development could commence at the earliest possible opportunity.

 

Resolved -

 

(1)       That the application be referred to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government under the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Consultation)(England) Direction 2009 and, subject to him deciding not to call-in the application for determination, it be approved for the reasons and subject to the conditions set out in the Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways’ technical report.

 

(2)       That the grant of planning permission be subject also to the completion of a legal planning obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, or such other lawful mechanism for securing the heads of terms as may be agreed in consultation with the City Solicitor, in respect of:

 

(i)            On-site affordable housing provision of 6 units at a level of discount on the open market value of the properties necessary to allow disposal of the properties to a Registered Social Landlord,

(ii)          The payment of a sum of £93,415 to the Local Planning Authority for the purpose of upgrading the existing educational infrastructure at Menston Primary School or Burley Oaks Primary School,

(iii)         The payment of a sum of £120,660 to the Local Planning Authority for the purpose of upgrading the existing educational infrastructure at Ilkley Grammar School,

(iv)         The payment of a sum of £21,334 to the Local Planning Authority for the purpose of improving recreational infrastructure; to be used either towards the delivery of a new Multi Use Games Area on land to the west of Iron Row or for drainage works, footpath works and fencing at Iron Row Recreation Ground and Burley Park,

(v)          On-site Recreation/Open Space Provision:

(a)  Provision of a ‘Public Plaza and Gardens’ in the area shown on the ‘Landscape Management Plan’, to be made available and accessible for public use in perpetuity in accordance with details to be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority;

(b)  Provision of the ‘Riverside Walk’ in the area shown on the ‘Landscape Management Plan’ to be made available and accessible for public use in perpetuity in accordance with details to be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority;

(c)  Approval of details and implementation of a plan for the management/maintenance of the Public Plaza and Gardens, Riverside Walk, Woodland Areas and Wildlife Meadows, as shown on the ‘Landscape Management Plan’,

 

the legal planning obligation to contain such other ancillary provisions as the Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways (after consultation with the City Solicitor) considers appropriate.

 

ACTION:       Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways

                        City Solicitor