Agenda and minutes

  The Chair welcomed everyone to the first North and East Plans Panel of 2014 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 13-16 of the Members’ Code of Conduct. 

  There were no declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests

  Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Wilkinson

To approve the minutes of the North and East Plans Panel meeting held on 19^th December 2013

(minutes attached)

  RESOLVED -  That the minutes of the North and East Plans Panel meeting held on 19^th December 2013 be approved

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for single storey dwelling to garden plot

(report attached)

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

  Officers presented the report which sought approval for a single storey dwelling to the garden of the Old Parsonage, East Keswick, a Grade II Listed Building which was situated in a Conservation Area

  Details of the topography of the site; boundary treatment; access arrangements and design of the proposed dwelling were provided.  It was acknowledged that the proposals would require a level of excavation to be carried out

  In terms of landscaping, two protected lime trees which had been extensively pollarded would require removal, which was felt to be acceptable in this case, with some replacement planting being provided

  Officers were of the view that the proposed dwelling would be similar in height to the adjacent garage; that the principle of development was acceptable and that the proposals would not have an impact on residential amenity

  The Panel heard representations from an objector and the applicant’s agent who provided information which included:

·  the location of the site which was at the hub of the village

·  that the proposals were not in keeping with the character and charm of the village

·  tree loss

·  that the site was located in a Conservation Area

·  planning policy in relation to villages

·  that the proposals had been designed in line with guidelines contained in the Conservation Area report and the experience of the developers on sites in historic locations

·  that an arboriculturalist would be employed to deal with the landscaping issues

  Members discussed the application and commented on the following matters:

·  the extent of the tree loss as there seemed to be some discrepancy about the number of lime trees to be removed.  It was confirmed that there were two lime trees to be removed, although one of them was multi-stemmed

·  the level of excavation which would be required and how the existing boundary treatment to the northern elevation would be dealt with.  It was stated that retaining walls would be provided and that a proposed condition would cover this matter.  Members were also informed that the area of excavation was outside of the root protection area of the trees which would be retained

·  whether there was a link between the new dwelling and the existing property, in view of a path seeming to be shown on the plan.  It was confirmed that this was an error and that there would not be a link between the two properties

·  the proposed materials and the possibility of using reclaimed natural stone, in view of the historic nature of the area and the need for Ward Members to be consulted on the materials

·  highways issues, particularly the access to the dwelling in view of the number of cars parked outside the nearby village store and whether any form of road marking would be required on the opposite side of the road.  The Panel’s Highways representative stated that the manoeuvring did meet the standards, due to the wider verge  ...  view the full minutes text for item 94.

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for demolition of existing house and erection of three dwellings

(report attached)

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

  Officers presented the report which sought approval of the demolition of the existing dwelling and the erection of three new dwellings at Rigton Gardens, Bardsey

  Reference was made to an application for four dwellings at Rigton Croft, to the west of the site, which was refused and subsequently granted on appeal, with a revised scheme then being submitted and approved

  Access details were provided, with Members being informed that some dwellings would share the access with the scheme at Rigton Croft which would ensure there would only be four dwellings served off a private drive

  Proposed materials would be stone and slate

  Members were informed that the principle of development would be difficult to resist in view of the approved schemes at Rigton Croft; that there were no highways implications on Scarsdale Ridge or Scarsdale Lane and that there had been relatively few objections, although the concerns raised by a Ward Member were noted

  Members discussed the application and commented on the following matters:

·  the layout of the proposals with concerns that the dwelling to be located on the site of Southlands was close to its boundary and that of the adjacent property, Brocks Bank and in view of the size of the dwellings – 5 bed properties - this needed further consideration

·  that the layout needed to be reconsidered with concerns that it was cramped in what was effectively a cul-de-sac

·  the differing levels of the site and need to ensure the plans were accurate in showing the heights of the dwellings

·  that a better layout on the adjacent site had been achieved.  It was noted that it would be the same developer for both sites

·  that the principle of development could be accepted but that further discussions on the layout were required

The Panel considered how to proceed

RESOLVED -  To defer and delegate the application to the Chief

Planning Officer for approval, subject to conditions and in consultation with Ward Members to seek an improved layout of the development, especially an improved siting in relation to the property known as Brocks Bank

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for variation of condition number 4 to approval 30/213/97/FU (hours of opening)

(report attached)

  Further to minute 17 of the North and East Plans Panel meeting held on 11^th July 2013, where Panel refused an application for a variation of condition 4 of application 30/213/97/FU, relating to opening hours at a community centre at 166 Shadwell Lane LS17, Members considered a revised application

  Officers presented the report which sought to increase the hours of opening from 09.00 – 22.00 Monday to Friday (10.00 – 20.00 Saturday and Sunday) to 09.30 – 23.00 any day and during three, named festivals, from 08.00 – 00.30, with one notice per year to the Chief Planning Officer of the festival dates, at the start of the Islamic Year.  A management plan for all activities at the centre would also be required

  Members discussed the application and commented on the following matters:

·  the need for the additional hours during the week for core activities

·  the location of the car park, which was close to residential dwellings with concerns about noise and disturbance, particularly in view of the proposed increase to the regular opening hours

·  the need to include in the management plan a range of measures to mitigate against noise nuisance from the car park

Members considered how to proceed

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

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for one three storey block of 3 ground floor retail units with 14 flats over and one four storey block of 43 flats to former public house

(report attached)

  Plans, photographs and drawings were displayed at the meeting

  Officers presented the report which related to a mixed-use development on the site of the former Compton Arms Public House and contained a mix of retail and residential units, with car parking and green space.  Members noted that determination of the application – which was recommended for refusal by Officers - was deferred at Plans Panel East at its meeting in August 2012, in line with requests by a Ward Member and the MP to allow the applicant further opportunity to submit a scheme which could be supported

  Members were informed that the work undertaken since that time had not resulted in a suitable scheme, despite the will to see an acceptable form of development on the site

  The application was outlined with Members being advised there were concerns about the size of the four storey block; its height and its proximity to boundaries.  The design of the block was also considered to be dated

  There were also issues with the scheme in respect of viability and the difference in the S106 obligations which were sought and those being offered were noted

  Possible reasons for refusal of the application were outlined in the submitted report

  Members were advised that the applicant had submitted revised plans earlier in the week.  Whilst these were not complete plans and there had not been time to undertake a thorough assessment of the revisions which had been submitted, the reduction of the four storey block to three storeys was noted as was the reduction in the number of dwellings by five flats.  A reduced level of car parking was also noted along with the absence of a pedestrian link to the shops

  A request had been made by the applicant to defer determination of the application but due to the longstanding nature of this application, this request had been resisted

  The Panel heard representations from applicant’s agent who provided the following information:

·  that not all of the delay involved in bringing the scheme forward was due to the applicant

·  that refusing the application would achieve nothing and could delay bringing forward another scheme

·  that the applicant would prioritise the site and could bring forward another proposal by the end of March 2014

·  the proposed amendments and the reduction to three storeys of the flats block in the latest plans which had been submitted

·  the need for the scheme to be financially viable

Members commented on the following matters:

·  the density of the scheme and that even with five fewer dwellings the scheme was still over intensive

·  whether there were unusual costs associated with the site in view of the low S106 contributions being offered

·  that the application had been submitted in April 2008 and that the submission of revised plans days before the meeting was unacceptable

RESOLVED -  That the application be refused for the following reason:

The proposed development is considered to represent an over intensive form of development due to its excessive scale and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 97.

Thursday 20^th February 2013 at 1.30pm

  Thursday 20^th February 2014 at 1.30pm

  Thursday 27^th March 2014 at 1.30pm