Agenda and minutes

To identify items which may have been admitted to the agenda by the Chair for consideration.

(The special circumstances shall be specified in the minutes)

The Chief Planning Officer tabled one Late item of business for the Panel to consider, with the agreement of Councillor Taggart. The late report pertaining to Leeds Bradford International Airport had been despatched prior to the meeting. (minute 139 refers).

Additionally the Panel received a revised version of the planning officers report on Application 10/02363/OT Retail superstore at Armley, containing amendments arising from continuing discussions with the developer (minute 137 refers)

To declare any personal/prejudicial interest for the purpose of Section 81 (3) of the Local Government Act 2000 and paragraphs 8 to 12 of the Members Code of Conduct

The following Members declared personal/prejudicial interests for the purpose of Section 81(3) of the Local Government Act 2000 and paragraphs 8 to 12 of the Members Code of Conduct:

Councillor J Harper – Application 10/02363/OT retail development, Armley - declared a personal interest as Vice Chair of West Leeds Gateway Steering Group and as a member of the Townscape Heritage Initiative (minute 137 refers)

Councillor N Taggart - Application 10/02363/OT retail development, Armley - declared a personal interest as a member of West Leeds Gateway Steering Group (minute 137 refers)

To receive any apologies for absence

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Wadsworth and Wood. The Panel welcomed Councillor G Latty as a substitute for Councillor Wadsworth.

To approve the minutes of the last meeting held on 31^st March 2011 as a correct record

(Copy attached)

RESOLVED – The minutes of the last meeting held 31^st March 2011 were approved as a correct record

To consider the report of the Chief Planning Officer on an outline application submitted relating to development proposals for a new retail superstore with associated petrol filling station and shop, three new retail units and public open space along with off-site highway improvements on land off Carr Crofts, near Town Street, Armley.  Members previously considered a progress report on the proposals in July 2010

(Report attached)

The Panel considered the report of the Chief Planning Officer on an outline application including the siting and access arrangements for a large retail superstore with car parking and three retail units in Armley. The Panel was in receipt of a revised covering report setting out an amended description of development, amended officer recommendation, amended conditions and additional details of heads of terms for the Section 106 agreement.

Plans of the site, street elevations, architects 3D graphics and a photo montage showing the proposals in the street scene were displayed at the meeting. Officers addressed the revisions made to the report and highlighted the amendments made to the proposals since Panel received and commented on a position statement presented in July 2010. In particular:

Petrol station – Reduced in size, set back from Carr Crofts, reorientated to provide better access arrangements and live frontage onto Carr Crofts and improved roof design.

Conservation Area buildings – those originally earmarked for demolition to make way for the petrol station would now be replaced with new retail units to turn the corner on Town Street with public seating set in a wide pedestrian area. Officers concluded that the demolition now had a neutral impact on the Conservation Area, as the new buildings were an acceptable replacement in the conservation area.

Public transport – a new bus stop with real time display to be provided on both sides of Carr Crofts and those on Town Street to be relocated.

In addition officers reported on the following issues previously raised by Members:

Scale and impact on Armley Town Centre – officers reported they had investigated the impact of similar developments on similar town centres as requested in Batley and Rothwell – and concluded that those superstores had generally encouraged vitality in the towns and reduced vacancy.  However there had been some fall off in trade in Batley following introduction of a mezzanine, but this could also be attributable to current economic circumstances.

Whether a smaller scheme would be viable – as previous concerns about the impact of this development on the Conservation Area and highway impact had been addressed, this was no longer a fundamental issue.

Impact on employment – importantly, two companies currently on site had confirmed that they would relocate and expand within the Leeds district.

Officers reported their remaining concerns over the proposed roof form shown on the indicative drawings due to the expanse of the unit and the inclusion of roof lights which were felt to be contrived, but noted this could be dealt with at the Reserved Matters stage. Members were directed to the regeneration and employment benefits brought by the proposals as a key issue to consider in light of the matters now addressed. 

The Panel commented the site had historically been a busy area and noted the local support for the scheme, although they were concerned that the relationships between the new development and the neighbourhood were right. Members discussed the following:

Retail Mix –

• noted that Condition  ...  view the full minutes text for item 137.

To consider the report of the Chief Planning Officer setting out national guidance issued by Central Government. The report contains a copy of the letter dated 31^st March 2011 from the Chief Planner at the Department for Communities and Local Government and a copy of the Ministerial Statement issued 23^rd March 2011

(Report attached)

The Chief Planning Officer submitted a report setting out information sent to all Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) in England by the Chief Planner (Communities and Local Government) in respect of the national objectives in ‘Planning for Growth’. Appended to the report was a statement by the Minister for Decentralisation and further information on planning obligations.

(Councillors Coulson and Hardy resumed their seats in the meeting)

The Head of Planning Services highlighted the following

• the importance now placed on delivering sustainable growth and the clear expectation that a positive answer should be given to development and growth whenever possible, particularly for moving forward previously stalled schemes, although key sustainable development principles should not be compromised
• weight should be given to the economic factors and economic recovery when an application is finely balanced,

Members noted that Executive Board was due to consider the revised Affordable Housing (AH) figures on 18^th May 2011 and noted that any permission granted with the lower AH threshold will be required to be implemented within 2 years. The Head of Planning Services commented that applications to vary the AH offer were anticipated from those developers who had recently won appeals for residential Greenfield developments offering AH at the higher threshold. Members expressed concern that developers would repeatedly apply for extensions of time for applications with lower AH thresholds. The Head of Planning Services clarified that once the 2 years had elapsed with no development on site, a fresh full application would be required.

The Chair expressed interest in the impact this new approach would have had on some recent Panel decisions and requested officers undertake an exercise to review those decisions in the light of the government advice

RESOLVED - To note the report and attached papers and to have regard to them in making planning decisions

To consider the report of the Chief Planning Officer setting out a response to the enforcement matters raised at the meeting held 31^st March 2011 and including the 6 monthly monitoring report for the period October 2010 to February 2011

(Report attached)

Further to minute 123 of the previous meeting, the Chief Planning Officer presented a Late Item of business relating to monitoring of night time aircraft movements, air quality and noise at Leeds Bradford International Airport (LBIA).

The report was accepted as a Late Item as Panel had specifically requested a report at the last Panel on the reasons why enforcement action was not to be taken in respect of breaches of conditions as raised by Councillor Matthews and that it should be provided in the context of the latest monitoring report.

The Head of Planning Services apologised for the lateness of the report which was due to the time taken to get the required monitoring information but felt it was important that the information and explanation was tabled at this meeting.   He also made it clear that Members did have the option of deferring the item a cycle if they wanted to allow more time to consider its contents

The comments of an e-mail from local ward Councillor Campbell on the contents of the report and the approach taken by the Local Planning Authority to the monitoring of LBIA were read out in full to the meeting.

The Head of Planning Services outlined the circumstances of the last 3 breaches which had occurred since he wrote to the airport in May 2010 and considered that they were exceptional.  He referred to the history of Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) breaches; the improvement over time and the actions which had been taken by the airport to improve the situation.   The Head of Planning Services recognised that there were a number of factors to take into account before taking formal enforcement action and the impact of the breaches had to be weighed against the economic benefits brought to Leeds by PIA flying from LBIA.   Consideration was also being given as to how other airports dealt with breaches of conditions and the need to continue to work co-operatively with the airport

Members commented that allowing the planning conditions to continue to be flouted would set a worrying precedent. They noted the number of breaches which had happened over the last 3 years but that improvements had been made and the latest breaches were due to exceptional circumstances

Members considered that enforcement action at this time would not be appropriate but that the issue should be kept under review and the enforcement file should remain open.   We should continue to bring the matter to the attention of the airport and urge further dialogue with PIA to bring the quieter B777 aircraft into service on this route at the earliest opportunity

RESOLVED –

a)  To note the contents of the report in relation to night time aircraft movements, noise and the air quality monitoring

b)  To note the update in relation to outstanding enforcement action in relation to breaches of the planning condition on night flying and aircraft noise

c)  To support the approach adopted by officers so far, in seeking to resolve  ...  view the full minutes text for item 139.

To note the date and time of the next meeting as WEDNESDAY 25^TH MAY 2011 at 1.30 pm.

(Avoiding Annual Council which is to be held on Thursday 26^th May 2011)

RESOLVED – To note the date and time of the next meeting as Wednesday 25^th May 2011 at 1.30 pm (avoiding Annual Council on 26^th May 2011)