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  to 12 of the Members Code of Conduct:

  Application 10/03984/FU – Scott Hall Square Chapeltown LS7 – Councillor R Grahame declared a personal and prejudicial interest through knowing the applicant’s agent who had registered to speak on the proposals (minute 85 refers)

  Application 10/03984/FU – Scott Hall Square Chapeltown LS7 – Councillor Lyons declared a personal interest as a member of West Yorkshire Integrated Transport Authority as Metro had commented on the proposals (minute 85 refers)

  Application 10/04252/FU – Waitrose Capitol Parade Green Road Meanwood LS6 – Councillor Lyons declared a personal interest as a member of West Yorkshire Integrated Transport Authority as Metro had commented on the proposals (minute 87 refers)

  Application 10/04190/OT – White Rose Shopping Centre LS11 – Councillor Lyons declared a personal interest as a member of West Yorkshire Integrated Transport Authority as Metro had commented on the proposals (minute 88 refers)

  Application 10/04190/OT – White Rose Shopping Centre LS11 – Councillor Finnigan declared a personal interest as a member of Morley Town Council as the Town Council had commented on the application (minute 88 refers)

  Application 10/03753/EXT – South Queen Street Mill South Queen Street Morley LS27 – Councillor Finnigan declared a personal interest as a member of Morley Town Council as the Town Council had commented on the application (minute 89 refers)

  Application 10/02584/EXT – Park Mills South Street Morley LS27 – Councillor Finnigan declared a personal interest as a member of Morley Town Council as the Town Council had commented on the application (minute 90 refers)

  Applications 09/05411/FU and 10/00378/CA – Former Buslingthorpe Tannery Education Road LS7 – Councillor Lyons declared a personal interest as a member of West Yorkshire Integrated Transport Authority as Metro had commented on the proposals (minute 92 refers)

To approve the minutes of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 28^th October 2010

(minutes attached)

  RESOLVED -  That the minutes of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 28^th October 2010 be approved

  Regional Spatial Strategy

The Panel’s Lead Officer advised Member that as a result of a successful legal challenge to the Secretary of State’s revocation of the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS), reports would now refer to the RSS.  Accordingly the RSS forms part of the statutory development plan for Leeds with the Unitary Development Plan.  However, the Government had affirmed its intention to introduce legislation to abolish the RSS and the Government’s Chief Planning Officer had written to Local Planning Authorities advising them of this and stating that the intention to abolish the RSS was a material planning consideration

  The Panel’s legal adviser informed Members that the RSS remained in place and that it formed part of the Statutory Development Plan although the intention to abolish the RSS by legislation also needed to be taken into account when determining planning applications in terms of the weight to be attached to the policies in the RSS

  The Chief Planning Officer, who attended the meeting, stated that in cases where the RSS was relevant, Officers would address the degree of materiality in order to assist Members

  Recent appeal decisions

  Members were informed of two recent appeal decisions which had been published, these being for minerals workings at Newton Lane and a wind farm at Hook Moor.  In both cases the Inspector had dismissed the appeals, so endorsing the views of Panel.  Reports on both decisions would be submitted to the next meeting, for Members’ information

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for a detached two storey annexe accommodation with attached garage and car port to side

(report attached)

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

  Officers presented the report which sought permission for a two storey annexe, garage and car port within the grounds of Applegarth, which abutted but was not within the Linton Conservation Area

  Members were informed that the plan displayed at the meeting had been superseded and that a lift was now included, with a copy of latest plan being available for Members’ consideration

  Officers reported the receipt of an additional letter of objection which did not raise new issues

  If minded to approve the application, additional conditions were suggested by Officers

  The Panel heard representations from an objector who attended the meeting

  Members discussed the following matters:

·  planning decisions on neighbouring properties and whether a consistent approach was being adopted

·  the lack of comments in the report relating to highways

·  concerns that the scale and massing of the proposals were inappropriate in the location

·  the limit on the number of dwellings accessed from a private drive and whether the proposals impacted on these limits

Officers provided the following comments:

·  that the application was not for an additional dwelling and therefore Highways Officers had not formally been consulted.  The Panel’s Highways representative stated he was content that there were no highways grounds on which to refuse the application

·  the proposal was for an extension, albeit for a couple to live in and not an additional dwelling so that in this case, the limit on the number of properties accessed from a private drive was not a material planning consideration

Members continued to voice concerns at the lack of written information

on highways issues in the report

  RESOLVED – That determination of the application be deferred and a further report be submitted to Panel which addressed highways issues and the planning history of the locality

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for 8 bungalows and 21 houses with landscaping

(report attached)

  (Having declared a personal and prejudicial interest Councillor Grahame withdrew from the meeting)

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

  Officers presented the report which sought permission for a residential development which would provide 100% affordable housing on a cleared site at Scott Hall Square LS7

  Members were informed that the principle of development was acceptable as the site was a brownfield site and was in a sustainable location with reasonable access to public transport and other facilities

  Revisions to the design of the scheme had been made which now resulted in a less dense development.  In terms of the impact of the scheme on neighbours’ amenity, Officers were of the view that the revised scheme provided greater separation between properties and that concerns regarding overlooking and overshadowing could be addressed by appropriate conditions

  An existing footpath link in the southwest corner of the site would be retained and to increase natural surveillance in this area and address concerns relating to crime and anti-social behaviour, a two storey property with primary windows facing the footpath had been included

  Officers reported the receipt of two further letters of objection and outlined the concerns raised which related to the revised scheme, for Members’ consideration

  Reference was made to colour of the roofs which would be red tiled and not the colour shown in the graphics provided

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

  Members discussed the following matters:

·  the level of consultation and involvement the applicant had engaged in with the local community

·  concerns at the 2.5 storey houses and the view that these should be deleted from the scheme

·  the lack of a greenspace area in the scheme

·  the need to give further consideration to the crime prevention measures within the design of the scheme

RESOLVED -  To defer and delegate approval to the Chief Planning

Officer in accordance with the recommendation set out in the submitted report and subject to further negotiations taking place in respect of:

·  the removal of the 2.5 storey houses from the development

·  the provision of an area of greenspace on the site

·  further consultation by the applicant with local residents

·  Secured by Design requirements to be addressed

and in the event that these issues cannot be satisfactorily resolved, that a further report be submitted to Panel for determination

  (Councillor Grahame resumed his seat in the meeting)

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for a replacement detached 4 bedroom dwelling house

(report attached)

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

  Officers presented the report which sought the demolition of the existing house at 9 Linton Road Wetherby and its replacement with a larger property which had been designed to utilise the extreme slope of the site

  Members were informed that Wetherby Town Council had commented on the application in relation to the provision of a much needed pavement on Linton Road, but stated that the property was a replacement dwelling not an additional dwelling and that it was not feasible to extend the boundary to provide a footpath

  If minded to approve the application, further conditions were recommended which related to the gradient of the driveway; submission of ground and finished floor levels and details of the solar panels

  The Panel discussed the application and commented on the following matters:

·  the need for further details on the garage

·  further detail on the massing and design of the property

RESOLVED -  That consideration of the application be deferred to

enable further negotiations to take place in respect of reduced massing of the property; revised design of the rear elevation and clarification on the proposal for the existing garage to the front of the dwelling and that the Chief Planning Officer be asked to submit a further report to Panel in due course for determination

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for the variation of condition no 15 (opening hours) and condition no 16 (delivery hours) of approval 08/02993/FU (demolition of shopping parade and erection of retail food store with service yard covered and external car parking and landscaping ) (application approved in principle at the Plans Panel East meeting held on 28^th August 2008 – minute 81 refers)

(report attached)

  Further to minute 81 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 28^th August 2008 where Panel approved in principle application 08/02993/FU, Members considered a report of the Chief Planning Officer seeking the variation of conditions 15 and 16 of that approval, relating to opening and delivery hours for the Waitrose store at Capitol Parade Green Road LS6

  The Panel was informed that the proposed opening and delivery hours had been amended since the report had been despatched, following a public meeting held on 15^th November.  The revised proposals were outlined as:

  Opening hours

Monday to Friday 8.00 – 21.00 (representing an extra 30 minutes in the morning)

Saturday 8.00 – 20.00 (representing an extra 30 minutes in the morning and an extra hour in the evening)

Sunday no changes to the approved hours of 10.00- 17.00

Delivery hours

Monday to Friday 7.00 – 20.30 (representing an extra 30 minutes in the morning)

Saturday 7.00 – 20.30 (representing an extra hour in the morning)

Sunday no changes to the approved hours of 8.30 – 17.00

  In addition, opening hours on Bank Holidays would be restricted to 8am-8pm and the extended opening hours until 10pm as outlined in the submitted report were now proposed for 4 days per year, these being 21^st, 22^nd and 23^rd December and the Thursday before Easter.  A six month temporary period for the new opening and delivery times was proposed.  Members were informed that Environmental Health Officers had not raised objections to the proposals

  If minded to approve the application, Officers requested that approval be deferred and delegated to the Chief Planning Officer subject to the signing of a revised Section 106 Agreement/Deed of Variation

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

  Members commented on the following matters:

·  that additional hours were being sought within a few weeks of the store’s opening; whether this was poor planning or an attempt to extend the previously negotiated hours

·  whether a noise impact assessment had been carried out

·  the possibility of the store applying for an extension to their liquor licence

·  whether any data had been received from the traffic monitoring which had been requested as part of the original approval

·  whether the problems associated with staff parking had now been resolved

Officers provided the following responses

·  that a noise impact assessment had been carried out

·  that traffic monitoring was taking place and this would be assessed once sufficient information had been obtained to enable meaningful monitoring to occur

·  that the issue of staff parking in the surrounding streets had now been resolved

RESOLVED -  To defer and delegate approval of the application to the

Chief Planning Officer, subject to the conditions set out in the report, including the revised opening and delivery hours now stated and subject to the signing of a revised Section 106 Agreement

  (Under Council Procedure Rule 16.5, Councillor Finnigan required it to be recorded that he voted against the matter)  ...  view the full minutes text for item 87.

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an outline application for extensions for the provision of up to 2,048 sq metres of Class A1 retail floorspace and up to 1850 sq metres Class A3 restaurants and café floorspace

(report attached)

  Plans, graphics and photographs were displayed at the meeting

  Members considered a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for extensions for A1 and A3 uses at the White Rose Shopping Centre LS11

  Officers presented the report and referred to a previous application for an extension to an existing mezzanine unit at the shopping centre (10/00773/FU) which was approved in principle by Panel at the Plans Panel East meeting of 8^th April 2010 (minute 220 refers).  As part of that approval there was a planning obligation to submit a further application within 6 months, so enabling some control over the expansion of the White Rose Centre which, due to an appeal decision at Gateshead Metrocentre, the view existed that each unit could be regarded as a separate unit for planning purposes, so potentially enabling greater expansion of the White Rose Centre through the insertion of mezzanine floors up to 200 sq metres in each unit and without the need for planning permission

  Although the application before Panel was in outline, plans had been submitted which indicated possible areas for extensions to existing buildings and these areas were highlighted to Members, with Officers stating that the proposed extensions represented an increase in total floorspace of approximately 6%.  Panel was informed that the proposals restricted the extensions to current retailers in the centre to protect existing retail centres

  Members were informed that 40 car parking spaces would be lost as a result of one of the proposals but there would be re-provision within the site

  Officers reported a further letter of representation from Morley Town Council which welcomed the proposals for improvements to the bus station at the White Rose Shopping Centre but raised concerns that the jobs created at the centre would be at the expense of jobs from nearby traditional centres, thereby causing harm and reiterated the request that the application should also restrict the insertion of any additional floors within the spaces at the centre, not solely the A1 uses

  Members commented on the following matters:

·  whether the proposals would generate more traffic

·  the need for further details about local employment and training initiative and how ‘local’ was defined

·  the impact of the expansion on small and medium sized enterprises in Morley

·  the need for a rail link to be taken forward

Officers provided the following responses:

·  that with the relatively small expansion, little extra traffic was anticipated

·  that it would be possible to define ‘local’ to include not just Morley but other areas of South Leeds, e.g. Beeston, Belle Isle and Middleton together with clauses in the S106 Agreement relating to the provision of proactive recruitment campaigns

·  that a railway halt was not seen as feasible at this time and would involve the closure of another station – Cottingley – however, as part of the South Leeds Initiative, there was a proposal at this location – possibly a Park and Ride

Members considered how to proceed

RESOLVED -  

i)  To defer and delegate  ...  view the full minutes text for item 88.

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for extension of time period for planning permission 07/03491/FU – change of use carrying out alterations and extension of vacant mill building to form 42 flats and 2 houses with 2 garages and 18 car parking spaces

(report attached)

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

had attended

  Officers presented the report which sought an extension of time and an amendment to conditions in respect of an application for a residential scheme at South Queen Street Mill, Morley

  The request for Panel to consider the application was made by Morley Town Council and Members were informed that having considered the information submitted on the financial viability of the scheme, the Town Council was now content for the decision to be delegated to the Chief Planning Officer

  The applicant sought the removal of the requirement to provide affordable housing within the development and the provision of the full greenspace contribution.  Officers stated that Panel would need to consider these matters against the re-use of a derelict building that made a positive contribution to the character of the conservation area.  Officers were of the view that the application could be supported and recommended to Panel that the application be approved

  Members discussed the following matters:

·  concerns that concessions were being sought and the need for minimum standards in respect of planning obligations which should be met

·  that the LPA had already taken a flexible approach to the application as the design of the development did not comply with all of the guidelines

·  that the proposed wording of the S106 Agreement should be tightened up in respect of the ‘recession proofing’ element and rather than requiring a revised financial viability statement to be submitted in 2 years if the site ‘is not substantially redeveloped’, this should be amended to read ‘when 50% occupied’

·  that Members had not seen the information in the viability statement

·  that there was no indication in the report of a start date for the development and this information should be provided

·  that the contractor was currently on site; that the development would sustain construction jobs and that the current condition of the site was having a detrimental impact on Morley Town Centre

Members considered how to proceed

As Councillor Taylor had not been present for the whole of this item he

Indicated he would abstain from voting

  RESOLVED -  To defer determination of the application and to request the Chief Planning Officer to submit a further report, with accompanying financial information and providing a date for the commencement of works on the site

  (Under Council Procedure Rule 16.5, Councillor Lyons required it to be recorded that he voted against the matter)

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for extension of time period for planning permission 07/03820/FU for change of use of existing mill into 33 flats

(report attached)

  Plans and photographs were displayed at the meeting

  Officers presented the report which sought an extension of time and an amendment to conditions in respect of an application for a residential scheme at Park Mills South Street Morley LS27

  Having regard to the discussions on the previous application, the Panel requested the same information before determining the application

  RESOLVED -  To defer determination of the application and to request the Chief Planning Officer to submit a further report, with accompanying financial information and providing a date for the commencement of works on the site

  (Under Council Procedure Rule 16.5, Councillor Lyons required it to be recorded that he voted against the matter)

Further to minute 187 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 23^rd February 2010 where Panel resolved to defer and delegate approval to the Chief Planning Officer of an application for a detached retail unit, detached office/warehouse unit and petrol filling station with associated access, parking and landscaping, to consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer setting out the current position in respect of this application and seeking reaffirmation of the resolution to grant planning permission

(report attached)

  Further to minute 187 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 23^rd February 2010, where Panel considered two applications for supermarkets at Middleton and resolved to refuse the application from Tesco and to approve in principle the application from Asda, Members considered a report of the Chief Planning Officer providing information on the current position of the Asda application and seeking confirmation of the Panel’s decision in respect of that application

  Plans, photographs and graphics were displayed at the meeting

  Before considering the report, the Panel’s Lead Officer referred to a late representation submitted on behalf of Tesco which requested the Chair’s discretion to permit a speaker on behalf of Tesco to address the Panel at the meeting.  Members were also informed of the key issues contained in the letter of representation including:

·  if Members’ voted to approve the application this should be subject to a 12 month commencement of development condition to ensure timely delivery

·  Tesco’s view there had been a change in circumstances since February 2010

·  that the grant of planning permission to Asda had been on the basis of the situation at the time

·  that both application sites were edge of centre

·  that the application from Tesco was ready to commence, if granted permission

·  that there had been slippage in the Asda scheme and this was likely to occur again in the case of Brandon Medical which was to have been relocated by January 2011

·  possible delay to the road closure

·  that the linkage to Middleton needed to be considered as a whole in light of deliverability issues

·  that Tesco would deliver their scheme quicker and without the need for any road closure

·  that the proper approach would be for the applications for Asda and Tesco to be considered together at a later date

  The Panel’s legal adviser confirmed the point made in representations submitted by Tesco’s lawyers to the effect that the Chair has the discretion as to whether to allow public speaking.  He also referred to the Protocol for Public Speaking at Plans Panel.  He highlighted paragraph 2.14 of the Protocol which states that applicants, supporters or objectors will only be entitled to address the Panel on one occasion unless, in the opinion of the Chair, significant new information had been produced raising new material planning considerations.  He made the point that the Chair would need to make this decision taking into account the issues referred to earlier by the Lead Officer and also the report which concludes that there are no material changes justifying a change to the recommendation to approve

  Having considered this, the Chair was of the view that there were insufficient reasons to allow a representative of Tesco to address the Panel

  The Panel’s Lead Officer presented the report and referred to the minutes of the Plans Panel East meeting of 23^rd February 2010 which had been appended to the submitted report

  Central to Members’ decision had been:

·  the view of an independent retail consultant that 2  ...  view the full minutes text for item 91.

Further to minute 39 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 5^th August 2010, to consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on 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 39 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 5^th August 2010, Panel considered a report of the Chief Planning Officer setting out the current position on the proposals for a residential development at Buslingthorpe Tannery LS7

  Plans, graphics and precedent images were displayed at the meeting

  Members were informed that the applicant had taken on board Members’ previous comments and had reduced the number of units from 349 to 285, in a mix of 275 flats and 10 houses.   Provision of amenity space had been addressed, with each town house having its own private garden

  In relation to highways issues, Members were informed that further information was required

  The request for a well-designed marker building had been considered with design details emerging for a cylindrical-shaped building which took references from the tanning drums used on the site

  Members had stipulated the need for a S106 Agreement to deal with planning obligations and the applicant had submitted a financial viability assessment which would be considered

  Members provided the following comments on the issues raised in the report:

·  no objections to the scale of the buildings and the approach to the architectural treatment and appearance was generally considered to be acceptable

·  the need for buildings of the size proposed to retain a simple form and treatment

·  in respect of the tower, Option C was preferred, subject to the appropriate mix, proportion and use of materials (split between use of cladding and brick)

·  no issues in respect of the quality of the residential development and the amount and location of amenity space

·  to note that highways details were outstanding and that issues of viability would be considered when the application was presented for determination

Thursday 16^th December 2010 at 1.30pm

  Thursday 16^th December 2010 at 1.30pm