Agenda and minutes

Venue: Civic Hall, Leeds, LS1 1UR. View directions

Contact: Debbie Oldham  Email: debbie.oldham@leeds.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

Site vists

The Panel site visits were attended by Councillors Walshaw, Nash, Hamilton, Ritchie, McKenna, Wilkinson, and B. Anderson.

123.

Appeals Against Refusal of Inspection of Documents

To consider any appeals in accordance with Procedure Rule 15.2 of the Access to Information Rules (in the event of an Appeal the press and public will be excluded)

 

(*In accordance with Procedure Rule 15.2, written notice of an appeal must be received by the Head of Governance Services at least 24 hours before the meeting)

 

Minutes:

There were no appeals against refusal of inspection of documents.

124.

Exempt Information - Possible Exclusion of the Press and Public

 

1  To highlight reports or appendices which officers have identified as containing exempt information, and where officers consider that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information, for the reasons outlined in the report.

 

2  To consider whether or not to accept the officers recommendation in respect of the above information.

 

3  If so, to formally pass the following resolution:-

 

  RESOLVED – That the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following parts of the agenda designated as containing exempt information on the grounds that it is likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, that if members of the press and public were present there would be disclosure to them of exempt information, as follows:-

 

Minutes:

There were no exempt items.

125.

Late Items

 

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

 

(The special circumstances shall be specified in the minutes)

 

Minutes:

There were no late items.

126.

Declarations of Disclosable Pecuniary Interests

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. 

Minutes:

There were no declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests. However, Cllr. S Hamilton declared that she knew the applicants of Item 11 – 16/04533FU – two storey/single storey side /rear extension; to include garage to side at 36 Buckstone Crescent, Moortown, Leeds, LS17 5HU were constituents of her ward and that she had met them.

127.

Apologies for Absence

Minutes:

Apologies for absence had been received from Cllrs. Ron Grahame and John Procter.

 

Cllr. E Nash was substitute for Cllr. R Grahame and Cllr. B Anderson was substitute for Cllr. J Procter.

The Chair informed the Panel that Bob Moody and Steve Bennett were present at the meeting as assessors.

128.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 91 KB

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 9th February 2017.

Minutes:

The minutes of the North and East Plans panel held on 9th February 2017 were approved as a correct record.

129.

Application 16/06904/FU - Retrospective application for a detached metal storage container for storing football equipment at St Matthews Church of England Primary School Sports Field, Stainbeck Lane, Meanwood , LS7 3QR pdf icon PDF 541 KB

To receive the report of the Chief Planning Officer on a retrospective application for a detached metal storage container for storing football equipment at St Matthews Church of England Primary School Sports Field, Stainbeck Lane , Meanwood, LS7 3QR.

 

(Report attached)

Minutes:

The report of the Chief Planning Officer brought an application for a detached metal storage container for storing football equipment at St Matthews Church of England Primary School sports Field, Stainbeck Lane, Meanwood, Leeds LS7 3QR.

 

It was noted that there were amendments to the report as follows:

a)  Condition 1 to refer to 12months

b)  That the application was not retrospective

 

The application sought planning permission for the placement of one metal storage container. The metal container is approximately 6metres in length, 2.5 metres in width and 2.6 metres in height and painted dark green.

 

Members were informed that the field was used by an amateur football club and by Mt Matthews Church of England Primary School and Chapel Allerton Primary School.

 

The Members noted that Sport England had made no objections. However there had been 14 objections received from local residents who objected to the proposal and an amended proposal to reposition the container. The objections relate to the container creating an eyesore, damage to tree, anti-social behaviour including people urinating against the container and noise disturbance and parking issues on the surrounding highway networks. Concerns had also been raised in relation to the fact that the land is owned by the Council and this had not been properly leased nor was the club paying any fees. The proposed re-siting of the container did not address any of the previous concerns and if sited close to the footpath would create a community safety issue and act as a litter trap.

 

Members were informed that the location of the container on the South West of the site near Henconnor Gardens was a conspicuous feature not acceptable in planning terms as there was no relief across the frontage to soften the impact of the container. Members were advised that the proposed relocation of the container to the north of the field would be approximately 16 metres from Henconner Garth making it less prominent. It was proposed that the relocation site be for 12 months to allow the applicant to seek a more permanent solution for the container.

 

Miss Carter one of the objectors was present at the meeting and informed the Panel of the follow points:

·  That the field was used by St Matthews and Chapel Allerton Primary schools

·  That the container had damaged some of the trees on the field

·  There was limited parking and that when the football club trained or played there was an issue with parking.

·  The container was an eyesore

·  People had been seen urinating against the container

·  That the field is located close to the Police station and that the police had attended the community meetings and had attended the area when football matches taking place on a Sunday

·  The ginnel close to the playing field and the container was a security hazard and had the potential to become used for anti-social behaviour. The ginnel was not brightly lit

·  If the container was sited near Stainbeck Lane this would be better as it  ...  view the full minutes text for item 129.

130.

Application 16/06911/FU - Change of use of land to traveller pitch with detached utility block and associated works, retrospective application for laying out of hardstanding land off Hollinhurst, Allerton Bywater, WF10 2HY pdf icon PDF 1 MB

To consider the report of the Chief Planning Officer for an application for change of use of land to traveller pitch with detached utility block and associated works, retrospective  application for laying out of hardstanding on land off Hollinhurst, Allerton Bywater, WF10 2HY.

 

(Report attached)

Minutes:

The report of the Chief Planning Officer requested North and East Plans Panel to consider the application for a change of use of land to traveller pitch with detached utility block and associated works, retrospective permission for laying out of hardstanding at land off Hollinhurst, Allerton Bywater, WF10 2HY.

 

The presenting officer provided the Panel with additional information as follows:

 

1.  In the recommendation an additional condition requiring the submission of a scheme relating to the re-instatement of the area of Green Belt including how the brick wall is to be dealt with within 28 days of the issuing of any permission and its implementation to be carried out before the end of the first planting season following approval of the scheme to re-instate the land.

2.  Objection in writing received from Ward Councillors for Kippax and Methley; Cllrs. Harland, James Lewis and Wakefield objections relate to the following:

·  Highways – Access and increased number of vehicles to the site

·  Visual Amenity – reference to previous decisions for dwelling house on the site, in particular the Appeal Inspectors Comments regarding the visual impact of the proposals

·  Neighbourhood Amenity – noise from generators and concerns about refuse management

3.  A further objection from a local resident who was not able to attend the meeting had been received on potential abuse of the site through occupation by more than the intended people, crime, anti-social behaviour, devaluation of existing properties and extra pressures on local services such as education and medical services

4.  A further objection from a local resident who had already submitted an objection was received following the publication of the report on the Council’s Web site comments in that objection refer to:

·  Reference to the site plan submitted shows it is clear that it will not allow parking, a day room, 2 caravans and a mobile home without moving the fence and encompassing more land or encroachment onto the green belt

·  Re-asserts that the applicant is selling his safeguarded site to a property developer and that this site is for relatives

·  That the report is full of half truths

·  That the hardcore was put down on 2nd August 2016 and was witnessed to be being carried out by the applicant and two young men

·  That the refused applications for dwellings were rejected on highway grounds due to traffic increases

·  That there was no equality when proposals for single houses were turned down for caravans and how was that in keeping with the area?

·  Para 4.7 of the submitted report makes the comment that the proposal is small in scale but yet the applicant had found the contact details of the owner of another piece of land and shown an interest in purchasing that

·  That the report referring to the area as low-noise level area is inaccurate and that it is a no noise level area at night and a large generator would cause problems close to existing houses

·  That the report is wrong at 10.19 describing the site  ...  view the full minutes text for item 130.

131.

Application 16/02759/FU - Demolition of existing buildings and redevelopment of site to include A1 discount foodstore, three units for A1 non food retail or A5 uses, one A3 unit and erection of 10 commercial units falling within use classes B1,B2, and B8 at Buslingthorpe Mills, Education Road, LS7 2AP pdf icon PDF 4 MB

To receive the report of the Chief Planning Officer for an application to demolish existing buildings and redevelopment of site to include A1 discount foodstore, three units for A1 non-food retail or A5 uses, one A3 unit and erection of 10 commercial units falling within use classes B1, B2 and B8 at Buslingthorpe Mills, Education Road, LS7 2AP.

 

(Report attached)

Minutes:

The report of the Chief Planning Officer sought full planning permission for a mixed use site consisting of 5 retail units that would be accessed from Buslingthorpe Lane.

 

Members noted that the position statement for this development had been brought before this Panel on 1st December 2016, and that the principles of the application had been agreed. Minute 94 refers.

 

However, Members had raised a number of concerns and requested further information. The submitted report addressed the issues of concern and provided further information. The main issues to be addressed were listed at 9.1 of the submitted report.

 

The presenting officer addressed the following issues:

·  Joint access to adjacent site

·  Parking provision

·  Impact on existing highway network

·  Electric Vehicle charging points and parent parking spaces

·  Use of photovoltaic panels / low carbon technologies

·  Signage

·  Materials to entrance doors frame features

·  External lighting

·  CIL

 

Members were informed that West Yorkshire Police had recommended that security facilities be installed such as lockable barriers to reduce and prevent anti-social behaviour and the use of HD CCTV systems and a reasonable level of illumination.

 

Members were advised that Yorkshire Water were not objecting as a condition to cover drainage was included.

 

Members were provided with clarification in relation to the recommendation of the Environment Agency.

 

Members were advised that marketing of the site had already started and that building works would start as soon as possible.

 

RESOLVED – That the Plans Panel resolved to defer and delegate approval to the Chief Planning Officer subject to the conditions set out on the submitted report, and that condition 16 to require the provision of CCTV, and the prior completion of a section 106 agreement to cover the following:

·  Travel Plan and monitoring Fee of £3,630

·  Local Employment and Training opportunities

 

 

 

132.

Application 16/03161/FU - Detached classroom block SLP College, Main Street, Garforth pdf icon PDF 702 KB

To receive the report of the Chief Planning Officer for an application for detached classroom block at SLP College, Main Street, Garforth.

 

(Report attached)

Minutes:

The report of the Chief Planning Officer requested Members to consider an application for a detached classroom block at SLP College, Main Street, Garforth.

 

Members were reminded that the application had been brought to North and East Plans Panel on 1st September 2016. Minute 55 refers. At the time Members had resolved to defer the application until clarification was obtained on matters set out at 1.1 of the submitted report.

 

Members were informed that the applicant had sought to provide responses to Panel Members queries and provided further information to allow for full consideration of the application proposal.

 

Members were advised of the information provided as follows:  

·  The college has 35 parking spaces on site for use by staff

·  Operating hours of the college are;

o  07.30am – 23.00 weekdays

o  08.00am - 22.00 Sunday

·  Student capacity would be 130 and Condition 7 dealt with hours of use of the classroom to be 08.30am – 18.00 hours

·  Rotation of the building by 90 degrees to allow windows to frontage of building

·  Acoustic measures have been taken and a condition against noise problems had been set out in the submitted report

·  No exams be taken in the detached classroom as there would be no toilet facilities

·  It was noted that the SLP is both a college and a dance school

 

RESOLVED – The Plans Panel resolved to approve the application subject to specified conditions as set out in the submitted report.

 

 

 

133.

Application 16/04533/FU - Two storey/ single storey side/ rear extension to include garage to side at 36 Buckstone Crescent, Moortown, LS17 5HU pdf icon PDF 5 MB

To consider the report of the Chief Planning Officer for a two storey/single storey side/rear extension to include garage to side at 36 Buckstone Crescent, Moortown, LS17 5HU.

 

(Report attached)

Minutes:

The report of the Chief Planning Officer requested that Members consider an application for a two storey/ single storey side /rear extension, to include garage to side at 36 Buckstone Crescent, Moortown, Leeds, LS17 5HU.

 

The application was brought to Plans Panel by Cllr. Dan Cohen. The concerns raised were that the proposal was too large for the plot and was dominant in the street scene, out of character, would result in increased parking in the local area, and had raised concerns about the access into the garage.

 

Members had attended a site visit earlier in the day and photographs and plans were displayed at the meeting.

 

The proposal was set out at 2.1 and 2.2 of the submitted report. Members noted that the dwelling was a 1930’s semi-detached property within a large corner plot which allowed for a large curtilage.

 

Members were informed that the applicant had previously applied for planning permission to split the plot and build a detached house to the garden. The relevant planning history was provided at paragraph 4.0 of the submitted report.

 

Members were advised that the purpose of the extension was for a disabled member of the family. It was noted that the application focused only on the extension and that the application did not focus on the internal changes to the property in relation to widening of doors.

 

Clarification was provided on the size and width of the extension due to the size of the plot.

 

The comment of the Parish Council was noted.

 

It was noted that the applicant had submitted a letter following letters of objection to address the concerns of local residents and these were included within the appraisal section set out at paragraph 10 of the submitted report.

 

Members noted that any potential sub-division would require the benefit of planning permission.

 

RESOLVED - That the Plans Panel resolved to grant permission subject to the specified conditions set out in the submitted report.

 

Cllr. B Anderson left the meeting during this application

 

134.

Application 15/06738/FU - Retrospective application for double garage with gym, snooker and cinema rooms above at Ling Beeches, Ling Lane, Scarcroft, LS14 3HX pdf icon PDF 755 KB

To receive the report of the Chief Planning Officer for a retrospective application for double garage with gym, snooker and cinema rooms above at Ling Beeches, Ling Lane, Scarcroft, LS14 3HX.

 

(Report attached)

Minutes:

The report of the Chief Officer asked Members to note the appeal decision on a retrospective application for double garage with gym, snooker and cinema rooms above at Ling Beeches, Ling Lane, Scarcroft, Leeds.

 

The application had been before the North and East Plans Panel on 7th April 2016. Minute 178 refers

 

Members were reminded that the planning application had been recommended for approval by officer’s, however the North and East Plans Panel resolved to refuse permission for reasons relating to the harmful impact the development would have upon the living conditions of the neighbouring dwellings by loss of privacy, loss of sunlight and daylight: and by way of over dominance. It was also considered that the proposal, due to its scale and design, formed a disproportionate and unsympathetic addition when compared to the main dwelling. The Council served an Enforcement Notice requiring the demolition of the building.

 

The applicant lodged appeals against the refusal of permission and the service of the enforcement notice.

 

Members were informed that the key issues identified by the Inspector were the effect of the building on; first the amenities of the neighbouring residents, and second, on the character and visual amenity of the area.

 

Members had been provided with a summary of the Inspectors comments a paragraph3 of the submitted report.

 

The Group Manager highlighted the following comments of the Inspector:

·  The Inspector had noted that the plans showed the eastern windows being blocked and accepted that this would overcome any concerns relating to overlooking issues.

·  The Inspector imposed a condition that required the building to be completed in accordance with the approved drawings

·  The Inspector had noted the scale and proximity of trees within the site and said that they cast a shade over the neighbouring residential properties in the afternoon sun as it set in the west. The Inspector suggested that the building was also shaded by the trees and did not cast any shadow outside of those cast by the trees. Therefore there was no loss of sunlight or daylight on neighbouring properties.

·  The Inspector noted the size and bulk of the building in relation to the main dwelling but did not find that it was in completion given the size of the plot in which it sits.

·  The Inspector stated that there was nothing particularly offensive in the design of the building and stated that the three dormers on the front of the building were symmetrically positioned. He was of the view that they were not dominant or prominent.

·  The Inspector described the building as functional and as being appropriate for its purpose and ancillary to the residential use of the dwelling.

·  The Inspector was of the opinion that the vegetation on the site effectively screened the building from Ling Lane.

 

Members were informed that the planning appeal was allowed subject to conditions by letter dated 1st February 2017. In light of the Inspector’s decision in respect of the planning appeal the Inspector quashed the enforcement  ...  view the full minutes text for item 134.

135.

Date and Time of Next Meeting

The next meeting of North and East Plans Panel will be Thursday 30th March 2017 at 2:30pm.

Minutes:

The next meeting of the North and East Plans Panel will be 30th March 2017 at 2:30pm.