Agenda item

The Assistant Director Planning – Community Development Services sought determination of a full planning application for the proposed erection of 15no. units for uses within Class E(g)(iii), B2, B8 and F2 with ancillary offices, erection of up to 5no. units within Class E and F1 with ancillary outdoor amenity space, open storage plot, an EV charging station, parking provision, a new access road from Weeland Road, internal access roads, associated infrastructure and landscaping at the former Kellingley Colliery, Turvers Lane, Kellingley. 

The application had been brought to Planning Committee at the request of the Corporate Director of Community Development as it raised significant planning issues. 

The Senior Planning Officer presented the report highlighting the site location and access; context of the site; proposal; and officer recommendation.

The agent, James Hall, spoke on behalf of the applicant, in support of the application.

During consideration of the above application, the Committee discussed the following

·       It was questioned whether the application had been brought before Members prematurely, given that of the 38 consultations issued, only two organisations had submitted objections, eighteen had indicated either no comments or objections, and twelve had yet to respond.  Clarity was also requested on the response received from the Environment Agency.

·       Clarification was sought regarding the weight to be afforded to the Selby Local Plan in Members’ deliberations, and whether the site in question formed part of an allocated area within that Plan.

·       In relation to the loss of transport provision, clarification was sought as to whether any preliminary discussions had taken place regarding the establishment of a railway halt at the site for passenger services.

·       It was queried if a Section 106 agreement had been secured in relation to highways improvements as officers had highlighted that there would be a significant impact on the highways infrastructure.

·       Clarification was sought on whether the mine shafts had been appropriately capped and filled.

Members discussed the potential deferral of the application, noting that a number of outstanding issues required addressing.  In view of the applicant’s willingness to engage in further negotiations, it was considered appropriate to allow time for the applicant and officers to seek to resolve these matters; however, should this prove unsuccessful, the application would be brought back before Members for determination.  Officers advised that the application had been under consideration for a period of two years and therefore recommended that, should Members agree to defer the application, then a definitive time limit be imposed.

Councillor Cattanach proposed that, as per the officer recommendation, the application be refused, however the motion did not receive a seconder, therefore the motion fell. 

Councillor Packham proposed, and Councillor Warneken seconded that the application be deferred with an extension of time attached, to enable further discussions between the applicant and officers regarding the reasons for refusal and any matters that may be resolved.

The decision

That consideration of the planning application be DEFERRED to allow officers, in the first instance, to secure an extension of time with the applicant, as the application was approaching the expiry of the statutory determination period, and thereafter to facilitate discussions regarding the reasons for refusal and measures to mitigate the identified issues.

Voting record

A vote was taken, and the motion was carried unanimously.

Councillor Warneken left the meeting at this point, and did not return.