Agenda and minutes

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. 

Councillor E Nash declared a disclosable pecuniary interest in Agenda Item 7, Victoria Road, Headingley, Leeds as she was in receipt of a small income from the local Co-op and the proposed convenience store would be in direct competition.

The Chair allowed the following late item to be considered:

·  Demolition of former Royal Park School and formation of public open space, Queens Road, Leeds.

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillor J Walker.

Councillor E Nash was in attendance as substitute.

To confirm as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting held on 10 October 2013

RESOLVED – That the minutes of the meeting held on 10 October 2013 be confirmed as a correct record.

The appeal for the development at Outwood Lane – a public inquiry had been held on 13 November 2013.  The appeal was dismissed.

Kirklees Knoll development – the public inquiry finished on 29 November 2013. A letter had been received from the Planning Inspectorate and the Secretary of State was set to announce a decision before 3 April 2014.

A judicial review of the Manor Park application had been held on 4 December 2014.

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an outline application for residential development and retail store.

The report of the Chief Planning Officer referred to an outline application for residential development and a retail store at Victoria Road, Headingley.

Site photographs and plans were displayed at the meeting.  Members were reminded of the previous decision to defer this application to allow further consultation with Sport England and Public Health England.

Issues highlighted in relation to the application included the following:

·  The outline application was for residential development and a retail store on the playing fields site of the Leeds Girls High school.

·  Photographs displayed trees that were subject to protection orders.

·  Existing access into the site fell within the Headingley Conservation Area.

·  The most contentious issue was the proposed development of protected playing pitches.  A previous inquiry had felt that this would not be contrary to policy.

·  With regards to the fact that a higher than average of the local population suffered from health issues, it was felt that there was no significance as facilities had not always been available for public use and other facilities were available.  The proposals would also include open space that would be available for public use.  The proposals also committed to the provision of play/sports equipment.

·  The proposed retail unit fell outside the nearby designated centre and complied with current UDP policies and the emerging Core Strategy.

·  The proposals would generate a requirement for affordable housing.

·  Section 106 package – including affordable housing, commitment to open space and maintenance, metro card contribution, improvements to local sports and leisure facilities and local employment opportunities.

·  Members were shown illustrations of an indicative layout demonstrating the massing and scale of the proposals.  It was felt that the scheme had progressed in a satisfactory manner and was in keeping with the character of the conservation area.

·  The proposals would provide much needed family housing in the area and would bring a brownfield site back into beneficial use.

·  The Panel was informed of further representations that had been received from a Ward Councillor and local MP.

A local Ward councillor addressed the Panel with objections to the application.  The following issues were raised:

·  Development of the site would destroy a much needed sports and leisure facility.

·  The bulk of the site was playing fields and unsuitable for development.

·  There were already too many convenience stores in the area.

·  It was 8 miles to the nearest similar facilities and there were no local pool facilities.

·  Potential use of the site as a community asset – further to a Panel Members question, it was reported that preliminary discussions had been held with Leeds City Council and Lees Metropolitan University.

The applicant’s agent addressed the Panel.  The following issues were raised:

·  The proposals fell within current policy arrangements.

·  The site only ever had limited public access and all extensive users had relocated.  Unlawful use of the site had also been limited.

·  Refusing permission would not give access to the site.

·  There was a housing need in the area and this would see the use of a brownfield  ...  view the full minutes text for item 72.

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an application for the laying out of access road and erection of 13 houses.

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an application for the laying out of access road and erection of 13 houses at Cherry Tree Drive, Farsley.

Members had attended a site visit prior to the meeting and site plans and photographs were displayed.

Further issues highlighted in relation to the application included the following:

·  The application had been brought to the Panel by local Ward Councillors due to a high level of local interest in the application.

·  Part of the site would be retained as open space.

·  Access improvements.

·  Members were asked to consider impacts on the conservation area.

·  Due to the slope of the site, pictures wre shown demonstrating the scale and massing of proposed buildings so they did not affect existing properties on Cherry Tree Drive.

·  There would be no windows adjacent to existing properties.

·  It was recommended to defer and delegate the application to the Chief Planning Officer for approval.

A local Ward Councillor addressed the Panel with representations to the application.  These included the following:

·  There was no dispute whether the land was suitable for housing.

·  It was felt there were significant highways issues to address.

·  Concern that existing residents would suffer from light pollution form vehicles.

·  Concerns regarding parking.

·  Suggestions to alter access to the site.

·  Request for stringent conditions regarding the height of any buildings.

In response to Members’ comments and questions, the following was discussed:

·  Moving the access would result in the loss of trees and it would not be practicable to have two accesses so close together.

·  Increase in traffic would be minimal and it was felt the road would be wide enough for additional parking if needed.

·  The proposed height of the buildings had already been lowered and it was felt that conditions to the application would satisfy concerns.

RESOLVED – That the application be approved as per the officer recommendation and conditions outlined in the report.

Councillor R Wood abstained from the voting on this item and requested that this abstention be recorded.

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding the removal of condition 6 of previous approval 09/02530/FU to allow unrestricted 24 hour opening

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an application for the removal of a condition of a previous approval to allow unrestricted 24 hour opening at McDonald’s Restaurants Ltd on Low Row Road, Leeds.

Councillor E Nash informed the Panel that she had made an objection to the application but would remain in the meeting and would treat the application with an open mind.

The following was highlighted in relation to the application:

·  Members’ were shown details of access to the site and the drive through facility.

·  There were commercial premises adjacent to the site and industrial premises to the rear.  There were no restrictions on the hours of use of these other premises.

·  The nearest residential premises was 55 metres away.

·  A previous application had been refused due to concerns regarding noise.

·  A noise assessment had been carried out at the nearest residential properties and was found to be below the 5 decibel limit and therefore not an impact on residents.  There had been no complaints to Environmental Health regarding noise.

·  The site would also be on the route of the proposed NGT.

·  Similar restaurants also had 24 hour opening and granting the application would not set a precedent.

RESOLVED - That the application be approved as per the officer recommendation and conditions outlined in the report.

Councillor E Nash abstained from the voting on this item and requested that this abstention be recorded.

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an outline application for residential development including means of access and demolition of existing buildings

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an outline application for residential development including means of access and demolition of existing buildings at Department for Works and Pensions, Government Buildings, Otley Road, Leeds.

Members attended a site visit prior to the meeting and site plans and photographs were displayed.

Further issues highlighted in relation to the application included the following:

·  The site was currently used as office accommodation

·  Attention to protected trees.

·  The nearby Boddington Hall development.

·  Letters of representation focussed on access to Adel Lane and capacity of local schools.

·  Due to the nature of the pre-fabricated buildings on the site it was unattractive to future occupiers and residential development would be the most realistic option.

·  It was suggested that the intended layout of the development would not allow the site to be used as a ‘rat run’ though the layout was not for consideration at this stage.

·  Possible contributions to install a pedestrian crossing and traffic calming on Adel Lane to Church Lane.

·  Members were asked to note the report and respond to questions regarding the Section 106 Agreement.

In response to Members comments and questions, the following was discussed:

·  The site was currently only part occupied and had previously had a significant number of people accessing the site daily.

·  The Panel broadly supported the approach outlined in paragraph 9.7 of the report regarding traffic onto Adel Lane. Some concern was expressed regarding Adel Lane becoming increasingly busy.

·  Members supported the proposed Section 106 Agreement with an additional £110k should the NGT fail to materialise.

·  Members supported the proposals for further traffic calming along Adel Lane.

·  Members supported the view that a contribution be sought for a new pedestrian crossing and funding for a new bus shelter.

·  It was reported that modelling of the Lawnswood Roundabout was on-going with the NGT team.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding a pre-application presentation for a proposed primary school

This is a pre-application and no formal decision will be taken, however it is an opportunity for Panel Members to ask questions, raise issues, seek clarification and comment on the proposals at this stage. A ward member or a nominated community representative has a maximum of 15 minutes to

present their comments.

The report of the Chief Planning Officer informed the Panel of a pre-application presentation for a proposed primary school at the former South Leeds Leisure Centre, Beeston Road, Beeston.

Members were shown site plans and photographs of the site.

The following issues were highlighted:

·  The school would be a 2 form entry with 420 places and an additional 26 nursery places.

·  The site was located adjacent to the M621 and was an allocated N1 public space.

·  There were sports fields adjacent to the site and changing facilities were situated in steel containers – this was an issue for consideration.

·  The school would be expandable to a 3 form entry and it was proposed to be delivered for September 2015.

·  A transport assessment had been based upon the school being a 3 form entry.  It was felt that there was enough capacity within 400 metres of the school to accommodate extra parking.  There would be 38 staff and visitor parking spaces on site, rising to 48 if it was a 3 form entry.

In response to Members comments and questions, the following was discussed:

·  Concern was expressed regarding parking.  It was not felt that it would be adequate for parking on neighbouring streets and it was felt more provision should be made on site.

·  The current multi use games area on the site would be removed and a new one installed.

·  It was suggested that new changing facilities should be built for users of the adjacent sports field.  These would not have to be within the boundaries of the school.

·  Internal layout of the school – space would be limited due to cost but would be compliant with guidelines including the Disability Discrimination Act.  Should the school become a 3 form entry there would be sufficient space in the school hall for assemblies.

RESOLVED – That the report and presentation be noted.

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an application and listed building application for conversion of former hospital to 27 houses and 8 flats and erection of 26 houses.

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an application and listed building application for the conversion of a former hospital to 27 houses and 8 flats and the erection of 26 houses at the former Wharfedale Hospital, Newall Carr Road, Otley.

Members had attended a site visit prior to the meeting and site plans and photographs were displayed.

Further issues highlighted in relation to the application included the following:

·  The original application had 71 dwellings; this had been reduced to 61.

·  Location of affordable housing within the site.

·  Additional representations received from a Ward Councillor stating concerns regarding the amount of affordable housing.

·  English Heritage and Leeds Civic Trust supported the proposals.

·  The reduced provision of affordable housing was due to the viability of the site.  It was considered acceptable to have a reduced amount due to this.

·  There were on-going maintenance liabilities for the listed buildings.

·  Should the application be approved, additional contributions would be sought for off-site highways contributions.

In response to Members comments and questions, the following was discussed:

·  The provision of more than 3 affordable housing units would compromise the viability of the site, it was considered to be a reasonable balance.

·  Stone from demolished buildings would be used wherever possible.

·  Final design of buildings was still under discussion and use of materials would be decided in consultation with Ward Councillors.

RESOLVED – That the application be approved as per the officer recommendation and conditions outlined in the report and additional conditions regarding emergency access and clarification regarding payment of £8,000 for a crossing point.

The report of the Chief Planning Officer updated Members on recent developments with regards to the proposal to demolish the former Royal Park Primary School on Queens Road and form an area of public open space on the cleared site.

It was reported that consultation regarding the site which involved the Director of City Development and Executive Board Member was on-going.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.

Thursday, 9 January 2014 at 1.30 p.m.

Thursday, 9 January 2014 at 1.30 p.m.