Agenda and minutes

  The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting and asked Members and Officers to introduce themselves

To disclose or draw attention to any disclosable pecuniary interests for the purposes of Section 31 of the Localism Act 2011 and paragraphs 13-18 of the Members’ Code of Conduct.  Also to declare any other significant interests which the Member wishes to declare in the public interest, in accordance with paragraphs 19-20 of the Members’ Code of Conduct.

  There were no declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests or other interests

In respect of application 12/03300/ADV – Churchfields, High Street Boston Spa - Councillor Wilkinson stated that he had commented on the application before he became a Member of North and East Plans Panel and having discussed this with the Panel’s Legal Adviser was informed that he could participate in considering this application (minute 17 refers)

  Apologies for absence were received from Councillor A McKenna who was substituted for by Councillor J Harper

To approve the minutes of the North and East Plans Panel meeting held on 4^th October 2012

(minutes attached)

  RESOLVED -  That the minutes of the North and East Plans Panel meeting held on 4^th October 2012 be approved

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for engineering works to form flood storage area

(report attached)

  Plans and photographs were displayed at the meeting.  A Members site visit had taken place earlier in the day

  The Panel’s Lead Officer provided a brief history of the site, for Members’ information

  The Panel was informed that outline planning permission was granted in 1997 for the erection of 6 houses.  The Reserved Matters application was however refused on issues relating to design and that the scheme did not take flooding into account.  The applicant lodged an appeal and planning permission was subsequently granted by the Inspector .  A S106 agreement was entered into which stated that provision would be made to address the flooding before commencement of the development, with this being accepted by the Inspector

  In 2006, a flood compensation scheme was submitted which the Environment Agency (EA) in January 2007, did not object to.  In July 2007, a severe flooding event occurred which resulted in the EA revising their position, stating that the proposed scheme was not fit for purpose.  Since that time until recently, the EA’s concerns were maintained and discussions to resolve the situation had been ongoing

  In 2008, the developer commenced laying out the foundations for a garage block on the site but was informed that work must stop as this was in breach of the S106 agreement.  The developer complied with this request but the works which had been carried out on site meant that the planning permission remained live, with this being checked with Legal Services

  Having been provided with contextual information in respect of the application, Officers then presented the report to Panel which sought approval for a flood compensation storage area relating to an approved residential development which was located in the functional floodplain (Zone 3b)

  The proposals were to raise the properties by 50cm and displace the water towards the floodplain area – Keswick Beck.  A cut and fill operation would be used, with the materials excavated being used to create a bund of up to 1.5m high, which, as well as being requested by the EA, would also provide a greater degree of comfort to the residents in the area.  Outlet pipes would be placed in the bund and whilst local concerns had been raised about the sewer which crossed the site, Members were informed that the sewer would not be impacted on

  To ensure the bund did not create more flooding, an agreement had been obtained with two adjacent landowners that their land could be flooded if a 1:100 year flood event occurred

  In respect of the EA, it was now satisfied that the proposed scheme was acceptable, as was Yorkshire Water and the Council’s Flood Risk Manager

  Whilst there had been a significant level of objections received to the scheme proposed in 2009, since the revised scheme which was before Members had been advertised,  it was reported that no representations had been received

  Members commented on the following matters:

• the issues raised previously by local residents and set out in paragraph 6.2 of the submitted report  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for partial demolition of existing retail units and extension of existing supermarket; laying out and landscaping to Hallfield Lane car park

(report attached)

  Plans, drawings, photographs and graphics were displayed at the meeting.  A Members site visit had taken place earlier in the day

  It was the decision of the Chair to consider the corresponding Conservation Area application (minute 16 refers) simultaneously, although each application would be determined individually

  Officers presented the report which sought permission for an extension to the existing Morrisons supermarket at the Horsefair Centre, North Street Wetherby LS22 which would include the partial demolition of existing retail units together with landscaping and improved car parking to the Council owned Hallfield Lane car park

  A revised plan was shown to Panel which included a coach drop off point and pedestrian link which the applicant had now included in response to comments from Ward Members and Wetherby Town Council.   Also to address local concerns, the residents’ car parking spaces within the Halllfield Lane car park would be retained

  A garden area would be provided at the corner of the site and whilst the scheme did not include public toilets, it did not preclude these being provided at a later date if funding could be provided

  In relation to improvements to the Hallfield Lane car park, this would include a new hard surface; lighting and landscaping.  Although there would not be an increase in the number of spaces being provided,  the 144 spaces would be marked out in the car park with the ratio between short and long stay spaces to be resolved by Highways Officers, in consultation with Ward Members

The receipt of a further letter of representation was reported, although it was stated that this did not raise any material planning issues

  Members commented on the following matters:

• the lack of toilets in the scheme.  Members were informed that toilets would be provided in the supermarket but these would not be public ones; although the provision of these was an aspiration and the layout of the proposals could accommodate them
• the likelihood of the scheme being implemented in view of proposals from Asda for a store on land at Standbeck Lane.  On this, Officers stated they were unable to comment on the motivation behind the application but stressed that it complied with policy

RESOLVED – That the application be granted subject to the conditions set

out in the submitted report

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an Conservation Area application for partial demolition of existing retail unit and covered mall

(report attached)

  With reference to the previous discussions (minute 15 refers), Panel considered a report of the Chief Planning Officer relating to a Conservation Area application for demolition of existing units and covered mall, to facilitate an extension to Morrisons supermarket at the Horsefair Centre, Wetherby LS22

  RESOLVED -  To grant consent subject to the conditions set out in the submitted report

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for retrospective consent for six flag signs and two non illuminiated signs

(report attached)

  Plans, drawings and photographs were displayed at the meeting.  A Members site visit had taken place earlier in the day

  Officers presented the report which sought retrospective approval for temporary planning approval for a period of three years for marketing signs advertising a forthcoming residential development which was located in a Conservation Area

  Members were informed that an earlier application to introduce a similar arrangement of signs across the frontage of the site was refused due to the proposals being harmful to the visual impact of the St Mary’s Church and to the character of the Conservation Area.   The revised scheme was considered to be acceptable; the signs were felt to be discreet and only noticeable when in close proximity to them and that the long distance views from Boston Spa were protected

  The Panel discussed the application with there being mixed views on the intrusive nature of the signs

Concerns were raised that the applicant, a major house builder, should have been aware that planning permission was required for these signs, prior to them being erected.   That fact that the hedge immediately adjacent to the signs was deciduous was raised as this would lead to greater visibility of the signs for several months of the year

In respect of the timescale of the application, although this had been presented as a temporary consent for three years there was concern that due to the housing market, the timescale for completion of the residential development could be much longer.  On this point, the Chair advised that if the site had not been completed within the three year period, a further application would be required to renew the temporary consent for the signs

  The Panel considered how to proceed

  RESOLVED -  That the application be granted subject to the condition set out in the submitted report

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for a detached house

(report attached)

  Plans, photographs and drawings were displayed at the meeting

  Officers presented the report which sought permission for a single detached dwelling on land adjacent to 8 Lowther Avenue Garforth LS25 and provided a brief history of the site, with Panel being informed that an outline application was granted in 2007 followed by approval of the Reserved Matters application in 2008.  At that time the site was considered to be a brownfield site, but in view of changes introduced to national planning policy in June 2010, the site was now considered to be greenfield.  Members were informed that had there not been an extant permission for the site, a less intensive scheme would be sought for the site.  What was being proposed in the application before Panel was essentially the same building which had approval apart from the removal of a chimney and the addition of a single storey rear extension with additional side windows

  Concerns had been raised about the relationship between the proposed house and the neighbouring properties but that an accurate street plan had now been provided.  In recommending approval of the scheme to Panel, Officers had noted the fall-back position which existed in this case and that most of the alterations could be allowed under permitted development rights

  The Panel heard representations from the applicant and an objector who attended the meeting

  Clarification was sought on the issue of height of the proposed dwelling, with Panel being informed this would be 5.6m to eaves height and 8.9m to ridge height, with the height of 9 Lowther Drive being given as 2.5m to eaves height and 6.4m to ridge height

  RESOLVED -  That the application be granted subject to the conditions set out in the submitted report

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for first floor side extension with window to side

(report attached)

  Plans, photographs and drawings were displayed at the meeting

  Officers presented a report to Panel seeking approval for a first floor side extension with window to the side at 60 Jackson Avenue Gledhow LS8.   Members were informed that as the applicant was a senior officer of Highway Services, it was considered appropriate for Panel to determine the application

  If minded to approve the application, an additional condition was recommended regarding clarification to be provided of the window detail

  RESOLVED -  That the application be granted subject to the conditions set out in the submitted report and an additional condition requiring revised plans to be submitted which clarified the window detail

Thursday 29^th November 2012 at 1.30pm

  Thursday 29^th November 2012 at 1.30pm in the Civic Hall, Leeds