Agenda and minutes

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

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)

There were no appeals against refusal of inspection of documents.

At the start of the meeting the Chair informed the meeting that during discussions on application 14/00575/FU 56 The Drive there would be an exempt discussion relating to legal advice in connection with the case.

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

Discussions referred to in minute 69 under Schedule 12A (3) Local Government Act 1972 and the terms of Access to Information Procedure Rule 10.14(5) and on the grounds that there would be disclosure of information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege could be maintained.  It is considered that if this information was in the public domain there would be potential legal implications in respect of the information discussed

There were no formal late items. However, in respect of application 14/0057/FU – 56 The Drive - a copy of the exempt legal information which had been circulated with the report at the meeting on 27th August 2015 was tabled to Members for information. (minute 69 refers)

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 disposable pecuniary interests.

However, in respect of application 15/03847/FU 29-35 Gledhow Lane, Cllr. Macniven brought to the attention of the Panel that she lived at 8 Gledhow Lane.(minute 71 refers)

Apologies for absence were received from Cllr. R Grahame, Cllr. J Procter and Cllr. B Selby.

Cllr. Towler attended for Cllr. Grahame

Cllr. Flynn attended for Cllr. Procter

Cllr. J McKenna attended for Cllr. Selby

The Chair heard a request from Cllr. Wilkinson who reported a request from Cllr Rachael Procter to defer two items;

Item 12 - Application 15/04649/FU – Reighton House, Moor Lane, East Keswick on the grounds that the submitted report was incomplete.

Item 13 - Application 15/03918/FU – Conkers, The Ridge, Linton, Wetherby be deferred as although consultation had taken place with neighbours since the last meeting no agreement had been reached and that discussions should continue and include Ward Members and Officers

The Chair considered the requests and suggested that the Officers continue with their presentations on both these applications before Members took a view on whether to defer consideration of these items.

To approve the minutes of the North and East Plans Panel meeting held on 27th August 2015

RESOLVED – That the minutes of the North and East Plans Panel meeting held on 27th August 2015 be approved subject to the following amendments:

Minute 49 – Declarations of Disclosure of Pecuniary Interests – that the minute be preceded by the following wording ‘There were no declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests, however…..’.

Minute 56 - Application 15/03918/FU Conkers – The Ridge Linton Wetherby. Councillor Wilkinson requested that the minute be altered to reflect concerns expressed that the site levels were not in accordance with the approved details

To receive a report from the Chief Planning Officer on an outline application for residential development of former highway depot site at land off York Road, Killingbeck Bridge and Selby Road.

(report attached)

The Panel’s Lead Officer reported that a request for a site visit had been received from Councillor Selby who had raised concerns relating to access.  In relation to a query from a member of the public, the Panel’s Lead Officer clarified the Public Speaking Protocol at Plans Panels

RESOLVED – That the consideration of this application be deferred for one cycle so that Members can visit the site.

To receive the report of the Chief Planning Officer to update the North and East Plans Panel in respect of the progress of the development granted by planning permission 14/00575/FU for a 4 bedroom detached house incorporating basement accommodation (part retrospective) and the applicant’s failure to comply with the terms of the unilateral undertaking.

(report attached)

Further to minute 53 of the North and East Plans Panel meeting held on 27th August 2015, where Panel considered an update report on this application, accompanied by an exempt appendix relating to legal advice, Members considered a further report of the Chief Planning Officer.

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

Officers outlined the current position in respect of works to achieve a practical completion of the building and referred to additional correspondence received on behalf of the applicant requesting an extension of time for the completion of the works and from the Residents’ Association raising concerns about the lack of progress; the safety of the building, with Officers pointing out that the Building Control function in this case did not rest with the Council and further concerns relating to detailed elements of the build which were beyond the planning merits of the Panel

Relating to the concern raised about the impact on neighbours of an overhanging tree on the site, Members were informed that the Environmental Action Team had contacted the applicant and that as a result, the tree issues would be considered comprehensively

The discrepancies between what was on site and the approved plans were outlined and the difference in the position of some windows were highlighted, which were largely due to the alterations to reduce the depth of the building

At this point, having resolved to undertake a discussion in relation to legal advice in private, the public withdrew from the meeting

A copy of the legal advice from Counsel which had been provided to Panel at its meeting on 27th August 2015 was circulated to Members

The Panel discussed the current position as seen on site and possible options to resolve this long-standing planning matter

The Panel’s Legal adviser responded to queries from the Panel and provided information on issues relating to the Compulsory Purchase Act 1965 and the process of serving of a Notice for demolition of the property and matters contained within Counsel’s advice

Following these discussions, the public were readmitted to the meeting

In light of the legal advice Members had received on this matter, it was considered that three options were open to the Panel, these being:

1) whether the works to the property were at a stage where Members were content that no further action was required

2) that Officers should continue to monitor the works and bring back a further report

3) that the appropriate actions be taken to bring about the process for demolition of the property

Members discussed the options, with the second option being preferred at this stage, subject to regular progress reports being received and a strict deadline being set for completion of the works.  For the avoidance of doubt, the Chair stated that if Panel resolved to pursue the second option at this time, the possibility of demolition as set out in option three and provided for in the signed Unilateral  ...  view the full minutes text for item 69.

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for change of use from public house (Class A4) to community education and training centre (Class D1).

(report attached)

Further to minute 54 of the North and East Plans Panel meeting held on 27^th August 2015, where Panel resolved not to accept the officer’s recommendation to approve an application for a change of use from public house to a community education and training centre (Class D1) at The Kiln, Brignall Garth, Members considered a further report of the Chief Planning Officer. The report included a possible reason for refusal of the application based upon Members’ previous concerns.

Members were informed that subsequent to the Plans Panel of the 27^th August 2015, a site meeting between officers and the applicant had taken place where concerns raised by Members where discussed, further information had been provided to address these concerns and this information including a timetable of proposed activities was included within the submitted report.

Members were informed that proposed changes included:

·  The removal of the paved area to the front of the premises providing car parking spaces for 10 cars, therefore a total of 21 car parking spaces were now proposed

·  The original proposal of a metal paladin fence to be removed and the proposal by the applicant for new boundary treatment around the perimeter of the site to comprise brick dwarf walls and brick piers with timber fencing in between.

·  A 1 metre deep landscape buffer was proposed behind the front boundary treatment to help soften the current environment.

The Panel was informed that the group the Ayendah Sazan was a registered charity established in 2006. The applicants were members of the Hazara community, who came to the UK in the 1999 onwards to escape persecution from the Taliban. The scheme was support by the local ward councillor and the Community Leadership Team who had received a presentation on the work of the group was satisfied with the amended proposals.

Two local residents spoke at the meeting against the application they outlined their concerns as:

• the size of the main room

• the access to the side of the building for vehicular access and the

  frequency this would be used

• noise levels

• opening hours

• possible unauthorised parking occurring on or around the premises

• the extent to which the community centre would cater for the 

  residents living close by

In response to questions from the Panel the residents explained that when the Kiln had originally opened as a public house it had been well run, a nice social meeting place used by local people. However, when it had been sold with a change of landlord the public house became a meeting place for people from outside the area and prior to its closure there had been problems with anti-social behaviour.

The Panel then heard representation on behalf of the applicant who informed them that he appreciated the concerns raised by the local residents. He said that the premises would be used as a training and educational facility to assist the Hazara community to integrate into society and assist their children with school work.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 70.

To consider the report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for the demolition of existing outbuilding; conversation of existing buildings to three dwellings with associated parking and landscaping at 29-35 Gledhow Lane.

(report attached)

Officers presented a report seeking approval for the demolition of existing outbuilding; conversion of existing buildings to three dwellings with associated parking and landscaping at 29-35 Gledhow Lane, LS8.

Plans and photos were displayed at the meeting and Members had visited the site prior to the meeting.

The Officers recommendation was to grant permission subject to conditions set out in the submitted report.

Members were informed that this was a sustainable location comprising of large semi-detached houses with good links in to the city.

The three two storey buildings located in the Roundhay Conservation Area which were adjacent to a Grade ll Listed Building were currently used for commercial purposes. Number 29 the outbuilding was set slightly apart from the other buildings the proposal was to demolish this building to allow car parking for three cars.

The proposal for the three dwellings was to have skylights to the rear of the properties to allow sufficient light into the properties. The skylights would overlook the neighbouring property. The Panel was informed that the proposal stated that the skylights would not directly look over the property at the rear as the internal floor level in the three dwellings would be 2.5 metres. The proposal was to have openings only at the bottom of the skylights and for them to be fitted with obscured glazing.

The Panel heard from Councillor Urry the local ward member, on behalf of the local residents against the application.

The local ward member highlighted a number of concerns with the application including: 

·  that the buildings had a history of flooding several times a year

·  the heritage nature of the building and its unique character due to the small businesses it housed

·  bin storage

·  addition of skylights could cause issues with the roof trusses

·  the skylights overlooking the property at the rear and the need for fixed skylights with opaque glazing

·  extraction of fumes for gas appliances

·  access to the dwellings through a narrow opening and restricted view when leaving to properties and entering a busy main road.

·  close proximity to primary schools and a nursery

·  that the scheme represented overdevelopment and should be refused

The Panel also heard from the architect representing the applicant who stated that he did not wish to address the Panel but was available to respond to questions.

In response to questions from the Panel further information was obtained:

·  flooding – if granted planning permission the developers would work with building control to address the issue of flooding prior to the start of any works.

·  he told how his client had consulted with the business owners and was assisting in the search for new business premises within the local area.

·  that currently some on-street car parking occurred from the premises but the inclusion of car parking for the proposed properties would reduce on-street parking

·  that the location of extractor fans and flues would be sited either to the front elevation, or through the roof with a slate ventilator tower

·  the properties if converted could  ...  view the full minutes text for item 71.

To consider the report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for a single storey front / side extension and two storey side extension with dormer windows at 7 Fern Way, Scarcroft.

(report attached)

Officers presented a report on an application for single storey front/side and two storey side extension, with dormer windows at 7 Fern Way, Scarcroft, LS14. The application was brought to Plans Panel by Councillor R Procter as a result of a number of objections being raised and a number of trees that have been felled on land close to the site.

Plans and photos were displayed at the meeting.

The Planning Officer explained that this was a stone built two storey building along a private drive with no access to the property from Syke Lane, however, the recent removal of some trees including some with Tree Preservation Order (TPO) have provided a view into the property.

The applicant had agreed to replant trees and this was covered by a separate agreement for application to plant trees.

The letters of objection had raised the following concerns:

• the new access off Syke Lane would cause highway safety concerns

  and harm the character of the rural area.

• a number of mature trees have been removed from the site and from 

  the grass verge off Syke Lane.

• the balcony would raise overlooking concerns.

• the extensions were too large for the plot

• the proposed dormers would appear at odds with the design of the

  building and the character of the area.

• the proposed new garage would over-dominant and overshadow No.9

  Fern Way.

Concerns had also been raised by Highways to the proposed new access on to Syke Lane.

As a result of the concerns raised the drawings had been revised these were the subject of the submitted report. These omitted the access road from Syke Lane and the two storey extension and balcony which were proposed at the north-western elevation of the dwelling had now been reduced to single storey and the balcony omitted from the plans.

Since the revised drawings were submitted no further objections have been received.

Members were shown properties within the vicinity which have also been extended.

RESOLVED – That the application be granted subject to the recommendations within the submitted report.

To receive the report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for the demolition of existing stable block, garage and outbuildings. Alterations to detached house approved under 13/04348/CLP (lawful development certificate granted for side, rear and front extensions, roof alterations and erection of outbuilding), along with a reduction in hardstanding area and erection of an annex and detached garage at Reighton House, Moor Lane, East Keswick.

(report attached)

With reference to minute 134 of the North and East Plans Panel meeting held on 5th February 2015, where Panel considered a report relating to unauthorised works to dwelling at Reighton House East Keswick LS17, the Panel considered a further report of the Chief Planning Officer setting out the submitted application. Members noted that earlier in the meeting a request had been made by Cllr. Wilkinson on behalf of Cllr. R Procter to defer consideration of this application on the basis that the report was incomplete; that there were issues around the height of the dwelling and its size and that it did not comply with Green Belt Policy with it being decided to hear the Officer presentation and for the Panel to decide how to proceed.

Photos and plans were displayed at the meeting. Members had visited Reighton House prior to the meeting.

The Panel’s Lead Officer informed Members that the height of the building had been surveyed as part of the monitoring process, but that Councillor R Procter did not share the conclusions which had been reached on this  Members were informed that the ridge height was in the region of 40cm lower than the original, however the roof tiles had not yet been put on and in respect of the size, it was accepted that the level of the extension was well above the 30% allowed under policy.

Reference was also made to the Certificate of Lawfulness which had been granted and which had been discussed at North and East Plans Panel meetings in November 2014 and February 2015

The application that had been submitted had been prompted by the Panel’s comments at the meetings in November 2014 and February 2015 that a planning application be sought. The Panel was reminded that the applicant still had a fall-back position of a valid Certificate of Lawfulness.

Members were informed that although the proposed family room was now slightly larger there was a reduction in the overall cubic content. Planning permission would secure issues of landscaping where a Certificate of Lawfulness would not.

Officers considered that the proposals were better and had less impact.

Councillor Wilkinson drew Members’ attention to points of concern raised by Councillor R Procter who had been unable to attend.

The points of concern being:

·  the Green Belt Policy of 30%

·  that temporary structures had been included in the area to be redeveloped which was not appropriate

·  landscaping could be moved at any time

·  no mention in the report of requests by Officers to stop work and building continuing

·  that the application should have been referred to the Secretary of State

In response to the concerns raised the Panel were informed:

·  that landscaping formed part of the conditions and should be in position for at least 5 years, replacing plants should they die during that time

·  that the development was not of such a size to be referred to the Secretary of State and the applicants had made it clear that they would not stop  ...  view the full minutes text for item 73.

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for variation of condition 2 (approved plans) of planning permission 13/03241/FU to allow minor material amendments to the east, south, west and north elevations at Conkers, The Ridge, Linton, Wetherby.

(report attached)

Further to minute 56 of the North and East Panel meeting held on 27^th August 2015, where Panel deferred determination of an application for changes to the design of a house – Conkers, The Ridge, Linton, which had been granted planning permission in early 2014, for discussions on a range of issues, the Panel considered a further report of the Chief Planning Officer.

Photos and plans including proposed landscaping were shown at the meeting.

A proposal for boundary treatment was to remove conifers at the side and rear boundary and replanted with evergreens and ornamental shrubs.

Members were reminded of the application and provided with a brief overview of the issues in relation to the objections received from neighbours.

During the presentation the Panel were shown slides that featured cross sections on how the slight differences in land levels between Nithbank and Conkers would be addressed.

The property at South Breeze was slightly higher than that of Conkers, the concerns raised by neighbours at South Breeze were in relation to the height of the wall adjoining the two properties; the boundary treatment would increase the rear wall and planting. The application also recommended that the link to the garage roof be altered to improve the outlook.

Councillor Wilkinson raised concerns on behalf of Councillor Procter in her absence and stated that although a meeting had taken place with the immediate neighbours nothing had been agreed. In view of this Councillor Wilkinson moved that the application be deferred but this was not supported.

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

Cllr. Wadsworth left the meeting after the consideration of this item.

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on two applications, 15/02634/FU relating to variation of condition 1 of previous approval 07/00605/FU relating to delivery hours and 15/02635/FU in respect of the erection of permanent storage facility within the store car park at Marks & Spencer store, Horsefair, Wetherby.

(report attached)

Further to minute 51 of the North and East Plans Panel meeting held on 27^th August 2015, where Panel agreed to defer consideration of applications relating to delivery hours and erection of a permanent storage facility at the Marks and Spencer store in Wetherby to enable a Members site visit to take place, the Panel considered a further report of the Chief Planning Officer.

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

Objections to both applications had been received from Wetherby Town Council and concerns raised by residents at Victoria Court. It was stated that Cllr. J Procter did not object to the applications but had requested that they be considered by Plans Panel due to the concerns about the impact to local residents.

The changes to the delivery times sought a variation in condition 1 of a previous approval to allow deliveries to be received an hour earlier. Currently deliveries are allowed between 08:00 and 18:00 hours Monday to Saturday and 10:00 and 13:00 hours on Sunday and bank holidays.

Members were informed that historically there had been previous permissions for extending opening hours over the Christmas period. 

A planning permission for longer hours had been refused in the past due to the impact on residents living above the premises. 

The current application sought delivery hours to be increased by one hour in the morning, starting at 07.00 Monday to Saturday and 09.00 on Sundays and Bank Holidays

In terms of storage on the site, unauthorised storage was occurring at the front of the store as there was insufficient internal storage to cater for what was a busy and popular store. The proposals were for a timber building with a felt roof to be constructed, with Officers being satisfied on the visual appearance of the proposed building.

On the issue of extending the delivery hours, objections had been received from a number of residents who lived above the premises, with the issues raised being outlined to Panel. The receipt of two letters of support also from residents who lived above the store was reported.

Members were informed of the comments received from colleagues in the Environmental Protection Team who had given strong advice to the effect that deliveries commencing at the times proposed by the applicant would lead to noise and disturbance for local residents.

The Officer’s recommendations in the submitted report to approve the storage building and refuse the extension of delivery hours were noted.

The Panel firstly discussed the application for the new storage facility with concerns being raised in respect of:

·  the need for the additional storage in view of an existing building at the end of the car park which appeared not to be fully utilised, except for the storage of disused items

·  the location and appearance of the proposed storage and that it was inappropriate in siting and design

As Members were minded to refuse the application, the applicant’s agent was invited to address  ...  view the full minutes text for item 75.

Thursday 29^th October 2015 at 1:30pm in the Civic Hall, Leeds