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 13-16 of the Members’ Code of Conduct. 

  There were no declarations of disclosable pecuniary interest.  Councillor Cohen brought to the Panel’s attention that in respect of application 15/00648/FU – 265 Alwoodley Lane, the applicant was a close family friend and that when Panel considered the application, he would withdraw for this item (minute 150 refers)

  Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Wilkinson, with Councillor Wood substituting for him

To approve the minutes of the North and East Plans Panel meeting held on 12^th March 2015

(minutes attached)

  RESOLVED -  That the minutes of the North and East Plans Panel meeting held on 12^th March 2015 be approved

To consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an application to raise roof height of main dwelling; two storey extension to front; two storey extension to side/rear; single storey extension to side; dormer windows to rear roof plane and create living space in roof

  Further to minute 141 of the North and East Plans Panel meeting held on 12^th March 2015, where Panel resolved to defer determination of an application for alterations and extensions at 7 Bracken Park Scarcroft, to enable a site visit to take place, the Panel considered a further report of the Chief Planning Officer

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

  Officers presented the report and informed Members that the two storey element was proposed to be sunken to a greater degree than had previously been proposed, so making it now similar in height to the neighbouring properties

  Sun path diagrams provided by the applicant were presented to Panel to show the extent of the overshadowing from the proposals on no.9 Bracken Park at various times of the day

  The Panel discussed the application, with the main issues relating to:

·  the size of the existing and proposed dwelling in terms of numbers of bathrooms and bedrooms

·  the sun path diagrams; the accuracy of these; the extent of the trees shown on the drawings and whether Officers had checked these submissions.  Concerns were raised that Officers had not verified the accuracy of the sun path diagrams; that the Department did not provide its own sun path drawings and the importance of having such information on cases where objections were raised on the grounds of overshadowing

·  the information shown on the sun path diagrams and whether this related to loss of light.  The Panel’s Lead Officer advised that loss of light was a different issue, with light meters being the usual way of assessing that particular matter

·  the impact of the proposals on neighbourhood amenity; the usefulness of the site visit in understanding the issues involved and concerns about the dominance of the proposals and that these would have a significant impact on visual amenity.  Concerns were also raised about the distances currently between nos 7 and 9 Bracken Park which were considered to be tight

·  the front extension; that the scheme could be improved by the deletion of this and the fact that on one of the drawings submitted by the applicant, this extension was shaded out which  did not help Members when considering the proposals

·  the need for further work to be undertaken on the scheme before it could be considered for approval

The Head of Planning Services referred to the sun path submissions

and advised that the extent of shade indicated at 16.00 in summer could be accepted as it was usually later in the day when shadowing occurred and that in a large garden, as was no. 9 Bracken Park, there was less of an impact

  Members considered how to proceed

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

To receive and consider the attached rep[ort of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an application for the demolition of existing house and the erection of three storey block of two flats.

  Prior to consideration of this matter, Councillor Cohen withdrew from the meeting

  Plans, drawings, graphics 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 to the demolition of the current dwelling at 264 Alwoodley Lane and it replacement with a three storey block of two, generously sized flats

  The planning history of the site was outlined to Panel which had included several co-joined applications with 266 Alwoodley Lane, for flat developments, although more recently applications solely for the subject site had been submitted with the most recent application for 3 flats and basement parking being refused and subsequently dismissed on appeal.  Planning permission had also been granted in 2009 for the demolition of the existing dwelling and the construction of a larger, five bedroom detached house, with Members being informed that the applicant now sought to bring forward a scheme with dimensions which reflected the 2009 approval, albeit for two flats

  Members were informed that the current application sought to address issues in the previous schemes.  In terms of the principle of development, local concerns about the loss of family housing and the introduction of flats had been noted, however the Inspector in determining an application on the site in 2012, was satisfied with flats being introduced in this location and that such accommodation did not necessarily preclude occupation by families  Members were also informed there was no policy to prevent flats being sited in any location

Details of the access arrangements; boundary treatments; outdoor space, internal layout of the accommodation and parking were provided.  Members were also informed that the footprint of the new dwelling would be set two metres further back into the site than the existing dwelling

In respect of impact of the proposals on the character of the area, the proposals would read as a two storey dwelling from Alwoodley Lane

Members were informed there were no issues in relation to highways safety or parking; that in relation to drainage, colleagues in Flood Risk Management had not raised concerns about what was one additional dwelling and that conditions were proposed to deal with drainage matters

The Panel heard representations from an objector who outlined concerns which included:

·  the planning history of the site and the impact on neighbours of frequent planning applications at 264 and 266 Alwoodley Lane

·  the possibility of a precedent being set for the development of flats in the area if the application was approved, with concerns this would lead to transient occupation and the loss of community/local life

·  the extent of local opposition to the application

·  the size of the flats being proposed

·  highway concerns, particularly on-street parking; the steep nature of the drive on site and the extent to which the underground car park would be used by residents because of this

The Panel then heard representations on behalf of the applicant who

addressed Members and provided information which included:

·  details of the on-site parking  ...  view the full minutes text for item 150.

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an application for external and internal alterations, single storey extension and addition of new air conditioning and condenser units

  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 related to applications for full planning approval and Listed Building consent for alterations to the former Crown Hotel Public House at High Street, Boston Spa, which was located in a Conservation Area

  The planning history of the site was outlined to Members with it being stated that the premises could lawfully be used as a retail store without a Change of Use being required, with the lawful use as a Public House being established on appeal and the use as a retail store being permitted by government statute.  Accordingly the retail use of the property and factors relating to the retail use were not material to the consideration of the applications before Members

  The proposal before Panel related to the internal and external alterations of the ground floor of the property, with many original features to be retained following discussions with the Council’s Conservation Officer.  A small infill extension at the rear of the site was also proposed.  The front of the property would remain unchanged

  Members were informed that signage did not form part of the application before Panel and would be subject to a separate application for advertisement consent

  In terms of highways issues, these were not a consideration in this case as the site could be used for retail development without the need for planning permission

  A late representation which supported the proposals was reported

  The Panel heard from a local resident who had objected to the application, with the main issues being raised relating to:

·  noise nuisance due to the number of deliveries to the store each day and obstruction from parking on Church Street

·  impact of the proposals on highways safety and the free flow of traffic, particularly at peak times

·  the need for delivery times to be restricted

The Panel also heard from the applicant’s agent who provided

information to Members, which included:

·  that the size of vehicles and use of beepers could be controlled and that a surface yard and delivery strategy would be provided

·  the applicant’s willingness to accept informatives on a planning approval, to address issues relating to the impact of the proposals on residential amenity

·  that the applicant would be willing to fund a Traffic Regulation Order to address highway concerns

·  that the applicant would be willing to enter into a Unilateral Undertaking to address highway issues relating to the property being used as a retail store

The Panel discussed the application, with the main issues raised

 relating to:

·  the lack of consultation with Ward Members.  Concerns were expressed about the approach taken by the applicant/agent in this case, this being to secure planning permission first and then seek to discuss issues with the local community

·  signage.  Members were informed that in this location, a heritage sign would be used, with Members seeking further reassurances about the proposed signage

·  that further details on several  ...  view the full minutes text for item 151.

Thursday 28^th May 2015 at 1.30pm

  Thursday 28^th May 2015 at 1.30pm in the Civic Hall, Leeds