Agenda and minutes

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

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

(The special circumstances shall be specified in the minutes.)

  There were no formal late items although the Panel was in receipt of the following information to be considered at the meeting:

  Application 11/02315/RM – Reserved Matters application – Manston Lane LS15 – a written representation from an objector (minute 71 refers)

To declare any 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.

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

  Application 10/04404/FU retail store at Moorhouse Avenue and Old Lane Beeston – Councillor Lyons declared a personal interest as a member of West Yorkshire Transport Authority as Metro had commented on the proposals (minute 66 refers)

  Application 11/02315/RM – residential development at Manston Lane LS15, Councillor Lyons declared a personal interest through being a member of West Yorkshire Integrated Transport Authority as Metro had commented on the outline application (minute 71 refers)

  Application 11/02315/RM – residential development at Manston Lane LS15 – Councillor Grahame declared a personal interest through his wife, Councillor Pauleen Grahame’s previous involvement with the application (minute 71 refers)

  Leeds East Academy – Position Statement – Councillor Lyons declared a personal interest through being a member of West Yorkshire Transport Authority as Metro had commented on the proposals (minute 75 refers)

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for erection of retail store with car parking and landscaping

(report attached)

  The Panel’s Lead Officer referred to a further objection received from a retail competitor to the application submitted by Tesco for a supermarket at Beeston.  Advice had been sought from the Council’s retail consultant and it was the view of Officers that in order to properly assess the information and provide correct advice to Panel, that the report should be withdrawn from the agenda to allow full consideration of all the issues raised, with a further report being submitted

  Members questioned whether the application would be brought back to the October meeting.  The Panel’s Lead Officer stated that it was not possible at this stage to commit to resubmitting the report to the next Panel but that it would be presented to Members as soon as all the information had been properly considered

  Concerns were raised that many people had attended the meeting for this application and whether they could have been notified of the possibility that the application might not be considered, which would have saved much inconvenience

  Officers apologised for this and reported that as many people as possible had been contacted about the possible withdrawal of the report from the agenda

  RESOLVED -  That the report be withdrawn from the agenda and that a further report be submitted in due course

To approve the minutes of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 11^th August 2011

(minutes attached)

  RESOLVED -  That the minutes of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 11^th August 2011 be approved subject to the following amendment to part of minute 56 – Application 10/05670/FU – 56 The Drive Crossgates LS15

  The Panel’s legal adviser, the Head of Development and Regulatory, referred to the complex legal history associated with the site and informed Members of a preliminary issue in that the applicant’s solicitor had made an application to the High Court seeking certain declarations of the court regarding the issue of the height of the building and maintaining that the Council was estopped from refusing the application based on height as a consequence of previous concessions made by it.   The Panel was informed that the applicant’s solicitor had requested the report to be withdrawn from the agenda pending the court case and that Judge Cockcroft, who heard the previous case, had been requested by the applicant’s solicitor to consider this case.   If the report was not withdrawn from the agenda, the applicant would reserve the right to refer to their letter on any subsequent appeal …………….

  With reference to Application 10/05670/FU – 56 The Drive Crossgates LS15, Officers reported that the High Court hearing into this matter had been set for 13^th September although it was not known which Judge would be hearing the case.  It was the Council’s intention to defend its position as vigorously as possible, although only two hours had been allotted to deal with the matter, which might necessitate a further sitting if the case was not concluded during that time.  It was agreed to update Members on the current position following the hearing

  With reference to minute 186 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 19^th May – Application 10/05711/FU – 11 Old Park Road LS8, the Head of Planning Services advised the Panel that some progress had been made on the issues relating to this application and that a report would be brought to the October meeting

Further to minute 145 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 17^th February 2011 where Panel resolved to refuse an application for one 3 bedroom agricultural worker’s dwelling with attached garage, to consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer setting out the Inspector’s decision on the appeal lodged against this refusal

(report attached)

  Further to minute 145 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 17^th February 2011, where Panel resolved to refuse an application for one 3 bedroom agricultural worker’s dwelling with garage at Riverside Nurseries, Linton, the Panel considered a report of the Chief Planning Officer setting out the Inspector’s decision on the appeal lodged by the applicant

  It was the decision of the Inspector to allow the appeal with a partial award of costs being made against the Council

  RESOLVED – To note the appeal decision

Further to minute 31 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 14^th July 2011 where Panel deferred determination for further information of an application for extension of time period for planning application 30/196/05/FU for change of use of land and buildings from agricultural to equestrian purposes, formation of arena and cross-country course, to consider a further report of the Chief Planning Officer

(report attached)

  Further to minute 31 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 14^th July 2011 where Panel deferred determination of the application for legal advice, Members considered a further report

  Officers presented the report and outlined the main points of a letter setting out the intentions of the landowners

  Counsel’s advice, as set out in the submitted report was outlined, with Members being informed that the advice given in relation to changes in personal circumstances of the tenant; whether personal circumstances were a material planning consideration and if so, the weight to be attached to these, accorded with the view of Officers on these matters

  Officers reported the receipt of further representations which brought the total number of objections to 72 individual objections and 2787 standardised objections

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

Further to minute 55 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 11^th August 2011 where Panel considered a position statement on a Reserved Matters application for a residential development comprising 132 houses and 19 flats, to consider a further report of the Chief Planning Officer including information on the context of the application

(report attached)

  (Prior to consideration of this application, Councillor Procter joined the meeting)

  Further to minute 55 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 11^th August 2011 where Members considered a position statement on a Reserved Matters application for a residential development comprising 132 houses and 19 flats, at Manston Lane LS15, part of the former Vickers tank factory site, Members considered the formal application

  Plans, photographs and graphics were displayed at the meeting

  Officers presented the report which also included information on the context of the application in relation to surrounding developments and the delivery of the Manston Lane Link Road (MLLR).  The Panel was informed that a revised layout plan had been submitted which was considered to be acceptable, therefore a change to the recommendation from defer and delegate to approval of the application was sought along with the deletion of conditions 5 and 9 which had been addressed in the revised plan.  Conditions 16 and 17 could also be deleted as they had been included on the outline application

  A typing error at paragraph 5.1 was corrected and it was confirmed that 260 units could be built across the two sites before the MLLR was in place

  In respect of affordable housing this would be at 25%; public open space locations had been secured as part of the application and that whilst Members had commented on the need for a play area to be included on the site, there was an agreement not to provide this and £62k had been secured by a S106 Agreement for off-site provision

  The various off-site highway measures agreed on the outline application and included in the report were referred to

  In terms of the provision of a railway station, this was beyond the remit of the application under consideration and that from discussions which had taken place, Metro appeared to favour improvements at Micklefield Station rather than the provision of a new station

  The application had generated some representations although many of these focussed on the highway implications of the scheme and the MLLR which were not part of the considerations for this application

  To address Members’ concerns about possible ransom strips, a condition had been included to ensure that proposed street connections to land east of the site would be constructed up to the boundary

  Details of the house types were provided which would comprise a mix of types, predominantly family housing although some flats had been included in the scheme

  Members were informed that a separate application would be submitted for the detailed landscaping

  Officers recommended approval of the application to the Panel

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

  Members discussed the following matters:

·  the traffic congestion in the area which would be exacerbated by this development

·  the lack of school places in the area in view of the family housing being proposed and the level of education contributions to accommodate these children in local schools

·  that the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 71.

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for the variation of condition 25 of planning permission 99/21/10/95/FU to extend the opening hours

(report attached)

  Further to minute 53 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 31^st July 2008, where Panel resolved to refuse an application for increased opening hours at McDonald’s restaurant on Low Road Hunslet, Panel considered a further application

  Plans and photographs were displayed at the meeting

  Officers presented the report which sought the same hours as had been refused by Panel in 2008 which was accompanied by additional information submitted by the applicant relating to the amount of activity that was likely to be generated through the increased early morning opening hours

  Members discussed the proposals and commented on the viability of the proposed opening hours, impact on residential amenity and litter issues, including the fact that whilst the operator included litter bins outside the restaurants, litter from their premises could be found further away and that conditions controlling this should be considered, if minded to approve the application

  The Panel considered how to proceed

  RESOLVED -  That the Officer’s recommendation to approve the application be not accepted and that the application be refused for the following reason:

The proposed hours of opening would lead to an additional number of comings and goings from patrons using the premises in the late hours/early hours of each day.  The associated noise and disturbance from such use, particularly in the early hours, would be significantly detrimental to residential amenity in the residential locality surrounding these premises.  The application is therefore contrary to policy GP5 of the Unitary Development Plan (Review) 2006 and guidance contained in Planning Policy Statement 1 – Delivering Sustainable Development (2005)

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for the variation of condition 9 – hours of opening – of planning approval 21/15401/FU

(report attached)

  Further to minute 115 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 25^th September 2008 where Panel approved the variation to opening hours at McDonald’s restaurant on Elland Road LS11, Panel considered a further request for an extension to the opening hours

  Officers presented the report and informed Panel than the applicant was seeking an additional 30 minutes opening time each morning and one hour later closing time on Thursday to Saturday to 1am and not Friday – Saturday as set out in the report

  A representation received from a local resident was reported as was Councillor Gabriel’s concerns about the possibility of increased litter in the area

  Members were informed of the litter picking scheme which was in operation at this site but not at the Low Road site (minute 72 refers) which involved litter picking patrols in the vicinity of the site several times a day, with further monitoring patrols taking place

  Members considered how to proceed

  RESOLVED - That a temporary one year permission be granted subject to amending condition 9 of planning approval 21/154/01/FU – to refer to Thursday to Saturday and the addition of a condition requiring litter collection to be carried out in accordance with the submitted details

Further to minute 60 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 11^th August 2011 where Panel resolved not to accept the Officer’s recommendation to approve the removal of condition 6 of previous approval 31/204/97/FU  and alterations to garage to form habitable room together with extensions, detached double garage and enlarged vehicle access, to consider a further report of the Chief Planning Officer setting out possible reasons for refusal of the application, for Panel’s determination

(report attached)

  Further to minute 60 of the Plans Panel East meeting where Members resolved not to accept the Officer’s recommendation to approve the removal of condition 6 of the previous approval 31/204/97/FU and alterations and extensions to the property at 3 Freely Fields, Bramham, the Panel considered a report of the Chief Planning Officer setting out possible reasons for refusal of the application based on the concerns raised by Members

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

  The Local Planning Authority considers that the proposed extensions and new hardstanding are harmful additions which, by reason of their overall size, scale, siting and the consequential loss of soft landscaping, are harmful to the character and appearance of the dwelling and the Bramham Conservation Area.  The proposals are thus considered contrary to the aims and intentions of policies N19, GP5 and BD6 of the Unitary Development Plan Review (2006) as well as guidance contained within PPS1, Delivering Sustainable Development and PPS5, Planning for the Historic Environment

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer setting out the current position on proposals for the demolition of Parklands Girls’ High School and the erection of Leeds East Academy

(report attached)

  Plans, graphics and an artist’s impression were displayed at the meeting

  Members considered a report of the Chief Planning Officer setting out the current position on proposals for the redevelopment of Parklands Girls’ High School to form the Leeds East Academy following pre-application presentations to Panel in April and June 2011

  Officers presented the report and addressed concerns raised previously regarding the positioning of the school within the site.  Although the options of developing on the north west of the site or on the existing car park had been considered, the reduced budget available for the development had meant this was not possible.  A financial viability assessment on these options had been carried out by the District Valuer who concluded that although some of figures provided seemed excessive, either option could not be undertaken without significant further investment

  A versatile and flexible approach to teaching areas was to be provided with learning ‘pods’ the size of which could be altered through interchangeable glazing and solid panels to adapt to the needs of the school

  A revised scheme from that seen in June had been submitted which had sought to refine the architectural detail and to introduce tonal differences in the materials used.  As the building was set back approximately 100m from the highway the detail of the building could best be appreciated close up

  CABE had contacted the LPA and expressed interest in this innovative scheme and had asked to undertake a design review, with the Civic Architect, Mr Thorp, appraising the scheme.  A response recently received from CABE was read out although it was stated that this, together with Officers’ responses to the issues raised, would be included in the report to the meeting on 6^th October 2011 when it was intended to bring the application for determination

  Further revised images of the scheme had been submitted that day which showed a simplification of the entrance area, fenestration improvements, the introduction of a roof canopy and the creation of two ‘bookends’ to the building which resulted in a less fussy, more bold and elegant design.  There were some initial concerns relating to the amount of rooftop plant which was visible although a full appraisal of the revisions would be made

  The Panel was informed that if approved, completion of the building was planned for February 2013

  As the development of the new building would take place whilst the Academy continued to function on the site, a temporary access road for construction traffic would be created

  The Panel’s Highways representative informed Members that the current 88 car parking spaces would be increased to 124 which was above the maximum guidelines in the UDP.  In respect of cycle parking, detailed matters remained to be resolved.  A recently signed S278 Agreement would provide for footway improvements to the residential development close to the site

  The possibility of a one-way system on South Parkway at the site frontage had been considered but was not thought to be appropriate as there were  ...  view the full minutes text for item 75.

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer outlining the consultation strategy for the Draft Householder Design Guide which is intended to be adopted as a Supplementary Planning Document within the Local Development Framework

A copy of the Draft Householder Design Guide has been e-mailed to Members and can be viewed as an electronic attachment to this report)

(report attached)

  Members considered a report of the Chief Planning Officer outlining the consultation strategy for the Draft Householder Design Guide which would commence on 19^th September.  A copy of the draft guide had been sent to Members separately from the agenda

  Officers presented the report and informed Panel that the document formalised the current approach being used to assess planning applications and encouraged good design

  Three new policies were proposed; these related to character, neighbourhood amenity and Green Belt, with ‘limited extensions’ within the Green Belt being defined as approximately a thirty percent increase on the volume of the original building

  Members welcomed the document which was likely to be formally adopted by the end of the year although it would be used in draft form before that time

  Some concerns were raised about the issues relating to dormer windows and it was felt that the proposals could lead to increased work for the Enforcement Section

  RESOLVED -  To note the report, the proposed consultation strategy and the comment now made

Thursday 6^th October 2011 at 1.30pm

  Thursday 6^th October 2011 at 1.30pm in the Civic Hall, Leeds