Agenda and draft minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Neil Swannick, Councillor Subash Sharma substituted and Councillor David Hugill, Councillor Heather Moorhouse substituted.

The minutes of the meeting held on 21 July 2026 were agreed and signed by the Chair as a correct record.

Voting record

13 For

2 Abstentions

All Members confirmed they had been lobbied on both applications.

Councillor Packham declared that, with reference to application 25/02006/OUTMAJ, he was employed as a consultant to the Stockeld Park Estate 20 years ago but had no contact since that appointment ended.

Councillor McCartney, Division Member for application ZG2023/1037/EIA confirmed he had an open mind on the application.

The Chair declared a personal non-prejudicial interest in application 25/02006/OUTMAJ as Division Member and would speak on the item then leave the room after presenting his case.

Councillor Arthur declared a personal non-prejudicial interest for application ZG2023/1037/EIA as he was an employee of Network Rail.

Report of the Head of Development Management – Community Development Services

The Head of Development Management – Community Development Services sought determination of an outline planning application (all matters reserved) for residential development, extra-care facility, local centre, primary school and associated infrastructure and landscaping with access from Weeland Road and Kellington Lane at land to western boundary of Eggborough, Weeland Road, Eggborough.

The application was referred to Strategic Planning Committee for determination as it was for a large-scale residential development indicated as providing more than 500 new dwellings and the recommendation to grant planning permission was recommended for approval. The application was accompanied by an Environmental Impact Assessment.

The application was considered by the Strategic Planning Committee on 19 May 2026, where Members resolved to defer the application for the following reasons:

a.     a decision on the application be deferred for an independent assessment on the provision of affordable housing provision and to review the mix of housing at the site and to review the use of CIL and S106 funds.

b.     that further engagement be undertaken with Network Rail on improvements to the rail service.

c.     that a site visit be arranged prior to the application being brought back to the committee.

The application had been brought back to the Committee for consideration and determination following submission of further supporting information regarding the areas of concern raised at the May meeting.

The officer advised that the applicant had provided further information regarding affordable housing, however there was no viability report or change to the affordable housing percentage and it was considered that the 10% provision remained policy compliant. There was no objection from the affordable housing team and no change to the officer recommendation or assessment on this matter.

The applicant stated that housing mix this would be secured through condition 53 at reserved matters and officers remain satisfied that this was the case. No consultee identified a deficiency in the proposed package of obligations or the means of delivery of CIL and Section 106

Network Rail had raised no objections. The applicant submitted a rail infrastructure briefing note which confirmed the extent of consultation undertaken with Network Rail and the package of station improvements that had been agreed as part of the section 106. Network Rail also provided background to the case for change business case, which was being prepared by stakeholders for service improvements to the line. CIL payments would help further that case for change.

A site visit took place on 10 August when members visited the village, the site from the North, from Weeland Road, from Kellington Lane, the railway and the school.

Since publication of the report, a further number of representations were received, a substantial number of objections and two letters in support of the proposal. The recommendation remained to grant the application subject to a Section 1 agreement and conditions as set out in the report.

Karen Wood Stones spoke to object to the application.

Councillor Susan Jackson spoke on behalf of Eggborough Parish Council and Councillor Mary McCartney spoke on behalf of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 168.

Report of the Head of Development Management – Community Development Services

The Chair drew Members attention to the update published on 6 August, which advised that several late representations had been received challenging various matters and raising concerns about the published report. Due to the volume and substance of the late representations, the officer’s updated recommendation was for members to defer consideration of the matter to allow officers sufficient time for proper consideration of the representations received.

Councillor Brown proposed and Councillor McCartney seconded that consideration of the planning application be deferred to allow officers to consider the late representations received.

Decision

It was unanimously agreed that consideration of the planning application be deferred to allow officers to consider the late representations received.

At the request of Councillor Brown, the Chair agreed that officers could provide an update on the application by the developers of a temporary well site at Burniston.

The officer advised that that the developer had made an application to the Environment Agency for an environmental permit. The Council's Environmental Health team may have been contacted but it was not a matter for the local planning authority.

The officer confirmed that the well could not be progressed until the planning application had been determined. Further updates would be provided in due course.

Tuesday, 8 September 2026 at 10:00am.

The date of the next meeting was confirmed as Tuesday, 8 September 2026 at 10.00am.