Agenda and minutes

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

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 paragraphs 8 to 12 of the Members Code of Conduct

  Application 10/02206/FU – 5 Croft House Mews Morley LS27 – Councillor Finnigan declared personal and prejudicial interests through being a member of Morley Town Council which had commented on the application and through knowing the resident of the neighbouring property (minute 32 refers)

  Application 10/01871/FU – Corpus Christi Catholic College Neville Road LS9 – Councillor Lyons declared a personal interest through family connections with the school and that relatives currently attended the school (minute 33 refers)

  Application 10/02074/FU – 13 Syke Road Tingley WF3 – Councillor Finnigan declared personal interests as a member of Morley Town Council which had commented on the proposals and as he had attended and made representations at a Licensing Committee when the applicant sought to obtain a licence for the sale of alcohol (minute 35 refers)

  Application 09/05411/FU – Former Buslingthorpe Tannery Education Road LS7 – Position statement – Councillors Coulson, Fox, Lyons and Matthews declared personal interests as members of West Yorkshire Integrated Transport Authority as Metro had commented on the proposals (minute 39 refers)

  (Further declarations of interest were made later in the meeting – minutes 36 and 38 refer)

To receive any apologies for absence.

  Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Latty, Parker, Procter and Wilson who were substituted for by Councillors Fox, Coulson, Wilkinson and Matthews respectively

To approve the minutes of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 8^th July 2010

(minutes attached)

  RESOLVED -  That the minutes of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 8^th July be approved

Further to minute 200 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 11^th March 2010, where Panel resolved to refuse planning permission and Conservation Area consent in respect of demolition of buildings and the erection of a small residential development, to consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer setting out the Inspector’s decision on the appeals which had been lodged by the applicants

(report attached)

  Further to minute 200 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 11^th March 2010, the Panel considered a report of the Chief Planning Officer on the outcome of a recent appeal decision following Panel’s decision to refuse planning permission, against the Officer’s recommendation, for a small residential development at land to the rear of 134-140 High Street Boston Spa.  An appeal against non-determination of the related Conservation Area consent had also been submitted

  The Head of Planning Services stated that in upholding the appeals, the Inspector had allowed the award of costs against the Council and had highlighted the weight Members had given to local knowledge rather than the evidenced fall back position contained within the application.  In respect of the costs application, this had not yet been submitted but that Members would be updated on this in due course

  In respect of another appeal against a refusal of planning permission by Panel, against the Officer’s recommendation relating to the erection of 3 detached houses at 2 North Lane Oulton LS26, the Head of Planning Services stated that this appeal had recently been dismissed as had the application for costs against the Council, with a report on this matter being presented to Members at the next meeting

  RESOLVED -  To note the report and the comments now made

Further to minute 21 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 8^th July 2010 where Panel deferred consideration of the application for further information, to consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for a two storey rear extension with porch to side, single storey side extension and detached double garage to rear

(report attached)

  Further to minute 21 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 8^th July 2010 where Panel deferred determination of the application to enable further negotiations and information to be provided, a further report was submitted

  The Head of Planning Services stated that there had been a number of representations made since the last meeting, particularly from Ward Members, the Parish Council and neighbours regarding on-going issues and that there had also been an incident involving the police.  In view of this the Members were asked to consider deferring consideration of the application for a further cycle, although the Head of Planning Services reminded Panel that where there were neighbour disputes, the Panel must confine itself to planning matters

  RESOLVED -  That determination of the application be further deferred and another report be submitted to the meeting to be held on 2^nd September 2010

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for a single storey extension to side and rear, raised roof height and former window with Juliet balcony to rear forming rooms in roofspace and enlarged driveway to front

(report attached)

  (Having declared personal and prejudicial interests in this matter, Councillor Finnigan withdrew from the meeting)

  Plans and photographs were displayed at the meeting

  Officers presented the report which sought permission for extensions to 5 Croft House Mews Morley LS27

  Members were informed that the attached property had a raised roof height for a dormer and an extension to the rear and on that basis Officers were recommending approval of the application.  Furthermore, Members were informed that whilst the dormer extension was large, it would be allowed under permitted development were it not for the increased roof height of 200mm

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

  (Councillor Finnigan resumed his seat in the meeting)

Further to minute 76 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 24^th September 2009 where Panel approved in principle an outline application for the refurbishment of Corpus Christi Catholic College, to consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for a four storey extension to front and four storey height extension to rear of school

(report attached)

  Further to minute 76 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 24^th September 2009 where Panel approved in principle an outline application for the refurbishment of Corpus Christi Catholic College, Panel considered a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for a 4 storey extension to front and a 4 storey height extension to the rear of the school

  Plans, photographs and graphics were displayed at the meeting

  Officers presented the report and informed Members that the proposals which were part of the Building Schools for the Future programme, sought to extend Corpus Christi Catholic College and provide a new sports hall

  Whilst the scheme would lead to a reduction in the number of hard court games areas, Members were informed that Sport England had not objected to the application

  Additional car parking would be provided including four spaces for people with disabilities and secure cycle storage facilities for up to 100 bicycles would be available

  In terms of highway improvements there would be improved accessibility to and from the school site and improvements to an off-site pedestrian crossing with a survey being undertaken to assess whether further off-site measures were required

  Members were reminded that the school was sited in a flood risk area and that a flood risk assessment had been carried out.  Officers were satisfied that the proposed development would not increase flood risk on the site or elsewhere and the Environment Agency (EA) had not objected to the proposals.  Whilst there was a requirement for compensatory flood storage, this matter was still being discussed with the EA

  Officers reported the receipt of a letter from Yorkshire Water stating there were no objections to the surface water drainage proposals

  As the off-site drainage works had to be resolved, Officers were requesting the application be deferred and delegated to the Chief Planning Officer for approval

  Members commented on the following matters:

·  highway safety issues in view of three schools being located in close proximity to Neville Road; that accidents had occurred in the past; that parents parked along Neville Road and on the pavements; that pedestrian safety had to be addressed and concerns that the proposals did not do this

·  whether the colour scheme of the whole building was being altered

·  the design of the sports hall and that it was poor in terms of visual amenity

·  whether the funding for the scheme was secure and if approved, when the contractor would start on site

·  the need for the site to be secured at all times during construction to prevent children from cutting across the site

·  concerns at the siting of the SEN block underneath the sports hall; whether this was appropriate and that good sound insulation should be used to prevent noise and disturbance for pupils

·  whether the development would use sustainable materials and construction methods

·  whether a Travel Plan had been submitted

·  flooding issues; whether a balancing reservoir was required and the need for assurances that the increased amount of hardstanding within  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33.

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for a detached 18.3 metre high monopole wind turbine to farm

(report attached)

  Plans and photographs were displayed at the meeting.  The site had been viewed from the A58 Wetherby Road en route to the visits scheduled prior to the meeting, which some Members had attended

  Officers presented the report which sought permission for the erection of an 18m high wind turbine at Beechgrove Farm Scarcroft LS14, which was situated in the Greenbelt and a Special Landscape Area

  A photograph showing a previous structure within the farm buildings on the site, - a 30m high silage tower - which was removed in 1995 due to wind damage, was brought to Members’ attention

  The Panel was informed of the following revisions to the report:

·  paragraph 6.1 – that of the 7 residents who had objected to the proposals, 5 lived on Ling Lane

·  paragraph 10.3 – that the on-site activities did not include a kennel business and vets but was a dairy farm

Officers reported the receipt of a further representation from a Ward

Member requesting the Panel to have regard to the views of the Parish Council and Ward Members

  In recommending approval of the application to Panel, Officers considered that very special circumstances had been demonstrated to outweigh the harm to the Greenbelt arising from the inappropriateness of the development; these being the environmental benefits of the proposed renewable energy development

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

  Members discussed the application in terms of its visual impact, its siting in the Greenbelt, PPS22 relating to renewable energy and the need to address global warming

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

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for a single storey extension to rear and new shop front, roller shutters and access ramp to front of ground floor shop and change of use of existing first floor flat to 2 one bedroom flats

(report attached)

  Plans and photographs were displayed at the meeting

  Officers presented the report which sought permission for extensions and alterations to shop and living accommodation at 13a Syke Lane Tingley to form enlarged shop and 2 one bedroom flats

  Members were informed that the main issues relating to the application were highway safety and impact on the living conditions of neighbours

  In terms of highway safety, no objections has been raised.  As the site was well screened to prevent overlooking there were no policy objections to the application in terms of residential amenity and Environment and Neighbourhood Officers had raised no objections, subject to a condition relating to provision of a sound insulation scheme

  The creation of 2 one bedroom flats would provide living accommodation which whilst being small, would be of an acceptable size.  As there was no concentration of flats or houses in multiple occupation in the area it was not possible to require a family-sized flat on the site

  Members commented on the following matters:

·  that one bedroom flats were not needed in the area but that family accommodation was

·  that problems with litter and anti-social behaviour had already occurred at the premises and that a licence to sell alcohol had been obtained leading to further local concerns

·  the view that good planning grounds existed for refusal of the application

·  whether it was possible to condition the retention of the mature hedge, with Officers stating this could be protected for a maximum of 5 years

·  that Keep Clear markings should be provided on the driveways of two of the adjacent residential properties.  The Panel’s Highways representative stated that this could be conditioned as part of an approval

RESOLVED -  That the application be granted subject to the conditions

set out in the submitted report and additional conditions to retain the mature hedge and the provision of Keep Clear road markings to the driveways of two adjacent properties

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for a change of use, including alterations and extension of part of public house to form 3 flats and covered car parking and erect detached block of 2 one bedroom houses and Conservation Area application to demolish outbuilding and part of annexe to public house

(report attached)

  Plans, drawings and photographs including an historical image were displayed at the meeting.  A site visit had been undertaken earlier in the day which some Members had attended

  Officers presented the report which sought permission for change of use, part demolition, alterations and extension of part of a vacant public house to provide new retail units, residential accommodation and parking on a prominent site on High Street Wetherby, which was situated in a Conservation Area

  Officers reported the receipt of additional comments from Wetherby Town Council, the applicant and the submission of a 205 signature petition in support of the proposals

  If minded to approve the application, Officers requested additional conditions be attached relating to:

·  the provision of a sound insulation scheme

·  submission of details of proposed rainwater goods

·  the removal of the advert hoarding on the gable end elevation

·  provision of a construction method statement

Councillor Wilkinson declared a personal interest as a member of

Wetherby Town Council but stated that he was not a member of the Town Council’s Planning Committee

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

  In relation to a comment made by the applicant’s agent in a meeting with Councillor J Procter regarding the application, it was stated that this meeting did not involve other Ward Members

  Members discussed the following matters:

·  the vehicular access arrangements to the flats, which were at the rear of the premises with concerns that residents would park on Cliffe Terrace for the purposes of unloading, so causing obstruction

·  whether an alternative entrance could be created to prevent these problems or remove vehicular access rights to the two flats or introduce a TRO

·  landscaping; that it was difficult to envisage where planting could be sited; that this might be better considered when the adjacent site was dealt with but that a semi-mature tree should be considered for the site and that the two self-seeded sycamores on the site were not worthy of preservation

·  whether there was a bat roost on the site and that the Nature Conservation Officer’s report should be made available

Officers provided the following responses:

·  that an alternative entrance might be possible but that it could affect the whole scheme

·  that it would not be possible to restrict vehicular access to the two flats as this was outside of the site boundary and that a TRO would not be possible as the access was private although it could be possible for bollards to be sited outside the pedestrian entrance as a mechanism to deter parking

·  that there was not a bat roost on the site but there was bat activity and that the Nature Conservation Officer’s report would be e-mailed to all Members

·  that conditions 12 and 13 regarding landscape retention and the preservation of existing and retained trees should be deleted

Members considered how to proceed

A further concern was raised at the impact of the proposals on the

availability of natural light to the ground floor  ...  view the full minutes text for item 36.

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on a Conservation Area application to demolish part of rear of retail premises/alterations to form new shop frontage, part demolition and reconstruction of rear of premises and change of use of first floor workshops, office, staff room and store to form 2 two bedroom flats

(report attached)

  With reference to the previous minute, Members considered a report seeking planning and Conservation Area consent for the demolition of part of the adjacent retail premises at 12 – 14 High Street Wetherby and alterations and extension to form new shop front and change of use for first floor flat to form two 2 bedroom flats

  A site visit had taken place earlier in the day, which some Members had attended

  Officers presented the report and stated the application was similar to the previous one considered by Panel in relation to the former George and Dragon Public House

  Officers reported a further representation which had been received from the Victorian Society although it was felt this related to the previous application (minute 36 refers)

  RESOLVED -  That the applications be granted subject to the conditions set out in the submitted report, plus an additional condition requiring the submission and approval of a construction traffic method statement

Further to minute 127 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 23^rd October 2008 when Panel resolved to grant outline planning permission for a major residential development forming the Beeston Hill and Holbeck PFI scheme, to consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer in respect of the applications listed below, seeking to vary conditions relating to number of units, affordable housing, greenspace, education provision, public transport provision and land contamination and to extend the time limit of applications for residential development

10/02786/LA/10/02785/LA/10/02947/EXT –  Folly Lane

10/02780/LA/10/02779/LA/10/02887/EXT –  Holbeck Towers

10/02772/LA/10/02770/LA/10/02956/EXT –  1-21 Coupland Road

10/02774/LA/1002773/LA/10/02957/EXT –  1 - 4, 2 – 20 St Luke’s Green

10/02769/LA/10/02768/LA/10/02956/EXT – 15 – 44 Coupland Place

10/02778/LA/10/02777/LA/10/02952/EXT –  Malvern Rise

10/02783/LA/10/02782/LA/10/02955/EXT –  Waverley Garth

10/02776/LA/10/02775/LA/10/02954/EXT – 165-183&131 159 Malvern Road

10/02788/LA/10/02787/LA/10/02951/EXT – 53-133 Bismarck St and 1-75 Bismarck Drive

10/02748/LA/10/02781/LA/10/02949/EXT –  10 - 64 Fairfax Road

(report attached)

  Further to minute 127 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 23^rd October 2008 where Panel resolved to grant outline planning permission for residential development on twelve sites comprising the Beeston Hill and Holbeck PFI scheme, Members considered a further report seeking variations to conditions in respect of ten of the sites

  Officers presented the report and informed the Panel that the project had reached the stage where two rival bidders had drawn up schemes for each of the sites and once a successful bidder had been selected, detailed Reserved Matters applications would be submitted

  Although outline permission was granted on twelve sites, only eight of these would be progressed to the detailed planning application stage.  Whilst ten sites were the subject of proposals to vary conditions, two of the sites could be subject to a future scheme but would not be progressed at this stage, these being the sites at Waverley Garth and Malvern Rise.  Members were also informed that the site at Cambrian Street had been removed from the project

  Members were informed that the original proposal was for approximately 700 dwellings being split between social housing and private dwellings.  Although a lesser number of homes would now be built – 275 - the revised scheme would provide 100% social housing

  Officers outlined the proposed variations in conditions which were set out in detail in the report before Panel

  Members were informed of the following amendments to the report:

·  paragraph 10.6 – it was not proposed to retain the requirement for a contribution towards education provision on the Bismarck Street/Drive and Holbeck Towers sites

·  that in all cases, the time limit for submission of Reserved Matters to be 3 years

Members commented on the following matters:

·  whether Ward Members had been consulted on the proposals

·  that the Council had consistently requested affordable housing on private developments over a certain size but it appeared there had been a u-turn in this case

·  which ALMO the sites came within.  Members were informed that the sites were within the control of Aire Valley Homes ALMO

·  planning contributions and how the figure of 50 had been arrived at as the threshold to attract developer contributions on certain schemes

·  whether a home zone aspect would be a feature of the developments

·  whether all safety implications had been considered, ie cctv, gates etc

·  the importance of Ward Members being involved in all stages of PFI schemes; the need to ensure time limits for construction were included and that there was full understanding of the amount of leeway contractors seemed to have, for example in respect of the materials to be used in construction

·  the need to ensure local training and employment opportunities

·  whether the principle of mixed development had been lost and that this should be referred back to Environment and Neighbourhoods Department

Councillor Finnigan declared a personal interest as a member of Aire

Valley Homes ALMO

  Discussion ensued on whether the fact that Councillor Gruen is the Executive Member for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 38.

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer setting out the current position in respect of an application for part demolition, change of use, including 5 storey extension and addition of new floor to roof of industrial building to form 190 flats and erection of multi level development up to 9 storeys in 4 blocks, comprising 9 town houses and 150 flats with shop, car parking and landscaping

(report attached)

  Further to minute 222 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 8^th April 2010 where Panel considered a position statement on an application for part demolition, change of use, including 5 storey extension and addition of new floor to roof of former tannery to form 190 apartments and erection of multi-level development up to 7 storeys in 3 blocks, comprising 9 townhouses and 150 apartments with retail shop, car parking and landscaping with a related Conservation Area Consent for demolition of industrial buildings at Buslingthorpe Tannery Education Road Sheepscar, Members considered a further position statement

  Officers presented the report and advised the Panel that a smaller scheme was now being considered; that the footprint of the buildings had been reduced and that the family housing now comprised town houses with private gardens

  A total of 336 units was proposed with 160 car parking spaces although Officers were of the view that the amount of car parking might need to be increased

  The Panel considered that the scheme was an improvement on the previous proposals but concerns were raised at the possibility of overlooking to the town houses, the lack of car parking and the need for further information on the open space areas of the site

  In response to the specific issues raised in the report, the Panel made the following comments:

·  there were no concerns regarding the principle of residential development, including the mix of units

·  that Members were more satisfied at the proposed reduced heights of the buildings and that these were acceptable and appropriate to the character and appearance of the Buslingthorpe Conservation Area.  Members also considered that a marker building on the corner of the site could be higher but that any extra height would need to be offset by a well designed stylish building of quality.  A suggestion of the inclusion of community art was also made

·  Members did not wish to see a representative sample of some of the single storey shed buildings retained on site as requested by WYAAS.  On this matter the Panel was advised that full archaeological recording of the site could be conditioned

·  There was concern about the amount of car parking which might be provided and that target numbers for car parking were requested.  Officers stated car parking levels would depend upon the mix of units; that the parking would be unallocated and that ideally a level of 70% car parking for small flats would be provided

·  No details had been provided on the quality of the residential development, but there was concern at the amount and location of the amenity space provided and that the Council’s Nature Conservation Officer should be involved in the proposals for the open areas

·  Overall there remained concern about the amount of development being proposed, particularly if car parking levels needed to increase with a consequential impact on the provision of amenity areas within the site

·  Members did wish the applicant to enter into a Section 106 Agreement to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 39.

Thursday 2^nd September 2010 at 1.30pm in the Civic Hall, Leeds

  Thursday 2^nd September 2010 at 1.30pm in the Civic Hall, Leeds