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 but Members were in receipt of the following additional information which had been circulated prior to the meeting:

  Aire Valley Leeds Enterprise Zone – Draft Local Development Order – plans of the site, with larger, A3 plans being tabled at the meeting (minute 149 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 paragraphs 8-12 of the Members Code of Conduct:

  Application 11/03752/FU – Foxwood Guest House Carr Lane WF3 – Councillor Wilson declared personal and prejudicial interests through knowing the applicant and stated that he would leave the room when this matter was considered (minute 140 refers)

  Application 11/01550/OT – Land adjacent to Castle Mona Lodge Wetherby Road LS14 – Councillor Lyons declared a personal interest through being a member of West Yorkshire Integrated Transport Authority as Metro had commented on the proposals (minute 142 refers)

  Application 11/02402/FU – Unit 12 Temple Point Austhorpe LS15 – Councillor Lyons declared a personal interest through being a member of West Yorkshire Integrated Transport Authority as Metro had commented on the proposals (minute 144 refers)

  Application 11/02402/FU – Unit 12 Temple Point Austhorpe LS15 – Councillor Grahame declared a personal interest through his wife’s involvement in this matter through being a Ward Member (minute 144 refers)

  Application 11/04226/FU – The former Methley Infants School Little Church Lane Methley LS26 – Councillor Parker declared a personal interest as he had sat in on a briefing about the proposals and stated that he had not formed any view on the application (minute 143 refers)

  Application 11/03952/LA – Former Braim Wood High School Wetherby Road Roundhay LS8 – Councillor Macniven declared a personal interest through being a Governor at Roundhay School as the application was for a 4-18 through school for Roundhay School Technology and Language College (minute 147 refers)

  Aire Valley Leeds Enterprise Zone Draft Local Development Order – Councillor Procter and Councillor Pryke declared personal interests through being members of the Aire Valley Leeds Board as the report related to this area (minute 149 refers)

  A further declaration of interest was made later in the meeting (minute 149 refers)

To receive any apologies for absence.

  Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Finnigan who was substituted for by Councillor Leadley

To approve the minutes of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 1^st December 2011

(minutes attached)

  RESOLVED -  That the minutes of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 1^st December 2011 be approved

Further to minute 14 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 16^th June 2011 where Panel resolved to refuse an application for change of use of part basement of existing ground floor shop to form one 1 bedroom studio flat, 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 14 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 16^th June 2011, where Panel resolved to refuse an application for change of use of part basement of existing ground floor shop to form one 1 bedroom studio flat at 482 Roundhay Road LS8, the Panel considered a report of the Chief Planning Officer setting out the Inspector’s decision on the appeal lodged against this refusal.   It was noted that the appeal was upheld by the Inspector but that the application for costs against the Council was refused

  RESOLVED -  To note the report

Further to minute 58 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 11^th August 2011 where Panel resolved to refuse an application for change of use of shop (A1 use) to hot food take away (A5 use) with new shop front and flue, 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 58 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 11^th August 2011 where Panel resolved to refuse an application for change of use of shop (A1 use) to hot food take away (A5 use), the Panel considered a report of the Chief Planning Officer setting out the Inspector’s decision on the appeal lodged against this refusal.  It was noted that the appeal was allowed

  RESOLVED -  To note the report

Further to minute 123 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 1^st December 2011, where Panel deferred consideration of the application to enable a site visit to take place, to consider a report of the Chief Planning on an application for a single storey extension to guest house

(report attached)

  (Prior to consideration of this matter, Councillor Wilson withdrew from the meeting)

  Further to minute 123 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 1^st December 2011, where Panel deferred consideration of the application for a site visit, Members considered a further report

  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 single storey extension to Foxwood Guest House which was sited in the Green Belt.  Plans showing previously permitted extensions were shown with Members being informed that the original 2 bedroom bungalow had been extended by 390%, with the proposed extension taking this to 418%, if approved

  Whilst the applicant had sought to demonstrate very special circumstances to outweigh the harm to the Green Belt, it was the view of Officers that these were not sufficient to set aside consideration of harm to inappropriateness, openness and loss of trees and because of this, refusal of the application was being recommended

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

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

  1 The Local Planning Authority considers that the proposed development constitutes inappropriate development within the Green Belt and is therefore harmful.  As no very special circumstances have been demonstrated, the proposal would be contrary to Policy N33 of the adopted UDP (Review 2006) and national policy guidance in Planning Policy Guidance 2: Green Belts

  2 The Local Planning Authority considers that the proposed extension would be detrimental to the openness of the Green Belt.  In the absence of very special circumstances, the application is contrary to Policy N33 of the UDP (Review 2006) and Planning Policy Guidance 2: Green Belts

  3 It is considered that the proposed extension will be visually intrusive, due to its size, proximity to the boundary and loss of existing trees to the rear of the existing dwellings and would be harmful to the appearance and character of the Green Belt.  In the absence of any very special circumstances, the application is contrary to UDP Policies N33, LT5, HO7 and GP5 of the UDP (Review 2006) and Planning Policy Guidance 2: Green Belts

  (Following consideration of this matter, Councillor Wilson rejoined the meeting)

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for use of land for grass boarding with associated access and parking

(report attached)

  Plans, photographs and drawings were displayed at the meeting.  The applicant also provided a grass board for Member’s information

  Officers presented the report which related to an application to use land off Carr Lane Thorner -  which was situated in the Green Belt - during the summer months for grass boarding.  Members were informed that the proposals would require breaking through a hedge to form vehicular access to a parking area for up to 20 cars and some slight indentations to be made in the grass

  Details of the highways issues relating to the proposals were outlined, with Members being informed of concerns relating to additional traffic along Carr Lane and that it was the view of Officers that the application should be refused, with a slight amendment being requested to include reference to pedestrians in the reason for refusal set out in the submitted report

  The Panel heard from the applicant and an objector who attended the meeting

  Members commented on the following matters:

·  the width of Carr Lane; inadequate passing distances at certain points and the impact of increased traffic in the area

·  the possibility of the provision of toilet facilities as set out in the submitted report with concern at the impact of this on the Green Belt

·  that grass boarding appeared to be an interesting and exciting activity but that this site was not suitable

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

The Local Planning Authority considers that the proposed development would generate additional vehicular and pedestrian movements along the substandard Carr Lane that would, in turn, increase the risk of accidents and conflicts between other motorists, pedestrians and road users.  It is further considered that the additional traffic would have an unacceptable impact on highway safety at the junction of Carr Lane with the A58.  The proposal is therefore contrary to policies GP5 and T2 of the UDP (Review 2006) and guidance in PPG13: Transport

Further to minute 121 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 1^st December 2011 where Panel deferred consideration of an outline application for layout and means of access for the erection of 11 houses, to consider a further report of the Chief Planning Officer

(report attached)

  Further to minute 121 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 1^st December 2011 where Panel deferred consideration of an outline application for the erection of 11 houses for additional information, Members considered a further report

  Plans and photographs were displayed at the meeting

  Officers presented the report and outlined the additional information which had been requested which related to the ownership of the ransom strip; the location of the Green Belt boundary and amendments which had been made to the scheme to address issues of residential amenity

  Members were informed of the receipt of three additional letters of representation

  The Panel commented on the following matters:

·  the Green Belt boundary with concerns about whether this should be encroached upon in any way

·  highways safety; that proposals existed to increase the speed limit in this and other neighbouring areas, with a limit of 40 mph being proposed for this area and that Panel should have regard to this when determining the application, with suitable conditions to address highways issues being attached to an approval.  The Panel’s Highway’s Officer stated that although the speed limit at this point was 30 mph, the average speed of drivers was 36 mph and therefore the visibility required for the scheme was based upon a speed of 40 mph

Members considered how to proceed

RESOLVED -  To defer and delegate approval to the Chief Planning

Officer subject to the conditions which were set out in the report presented to Panel on 1^st December 2011 and the undertaking of a reassessment of the scheme in view of the possible change to the speed limit and if agreement could not be reached, that a further report be brought to Panel for determination of the application

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for the demolition of the existing school and the erection of 12 dwelling houses

(report attached)

  Plans, photographs and drawings were displayed at the meeting

  Officers presented the report which sought permission for the demolition of a former primary school and its replacement with a residential development comprising 12 dwelling houses at Little Church Lane Methley LS26 on a site which contained various designations including Green Belt, Conservation Area, Special Landscape Area and protected playing pitch.  Members were also informed that a blanket TPO covered the site

  Members were informed that the proposals would remove a vacant and unsightly building; would provide a residential development with an overall reduction in footprint and reduced hardstanding area which would complement the surrounding properties

  Whilst some trees would need to be removed, the best species on the site would be retained with further planting being provided together with a long-term maintenance plan for the open space

  In terms of the protected playing pitch, this was historic and linked to the previous use of the site, with Sport England being satisfied with the proposals as replacement pitches had been provided on Church Lane and if approved, a commuted sum from this development would provide changing facilities for these pitches

  In relation to proximity from existing dwellings and window to window distances, Members were informed that the proposed scheme exceeded the distances set out in ‘Neighbourhoods for Living’

  Bats had been detected on the site, through summer roosts, with conditions being proposed to address this issue

  Officers reported receipt of an additional letter of objection which raised issues about plot 10.  Members were informed that the applicant had moved this plot 1m further away from the nearest existing property and that any additional re-siting would have greater impact on the scheme

  Members were informed that since the report had been written, a Unilateral Agreement for the Greenspace contribution had been completed and that if minded to approve the scheme it would be necessary to refer the application to the Secretary of State Department of Communities and Local Government as a departure from policy

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

  Members considered the application and commented specifically on plot 10

  RESOLVED -  To approve the application in principle and to defer and refer the application to the Department of Communities and Local Government as a departure from policy in relation to a Council owned site and delegate approval to the Chief Planning Officer subject to the conditions set out in the submitted report should the Secretary of State decide not to call in the application for determination

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application to erection 86 houses

(report attached)

  (Prior to consideration of this matter, Councillor Grahame withdrew from the meeting)

  Plans, photographs, drawings and sample materials were displayed at the meeting

  Officers presented the report which sought permission for a residential development comprising 86 dwellings on land allocated within the Leeds UPD (Review 2006) for employment use

  Members were informed that through a policy change to PPS4 requiring a sequential test to be carried out, given the supply of employment land within the city, this out of centre site could no longer be supported for employment use as evidenced by a refused planning application in 2008 which was subsequently dismissed on appeal.  Therefore alternative uses for the site could be considered

  A residential development was proposed with Officers being satisfied on the relationship between the proposed scheme and the existing adjacent office development, with further tree planting being included to address overlooking issues from the office building

  To mitigate against noise nuisance, acoustic fencing would be provided and for those properties closest to the motorway, enhanced double glazing and acoustically treated background ventilation would be provided.  Further information regarding noise nuisance was provided with it being stated that although plots 58, 59 and 60 at the south eastern corner of the site would still be affected by noise, this was not a reason for refusal of the application which could be sustained on appeal

  In respect of S106 contributions, it was stated that these were as set out in paragraph 9.34 of the report before Members, although the level of contributions exceeded what could be afforded by the applicant by £40,000 so requiring these to be reconsidered.  On affordable housing, a financial viability assessment had been undertaken within City Development which supported the developer’s case that the scheme would be unviable if any affordable housing provision was made

  Members commented on the following matters:

·  the difficulties for Members who sat on Plans Panels in responding to briefings/consultation on applications in their wards

·  the appearance of the buildings; that these were not in keeping with the Colton area and that the materials shown had been used in another part of the city with disappointing results

·  that the absence of affordable housing and issues around the level of S106 contributions were unacceptable

·  that a Scrutiny Inquiry had concluded that S106 Agreements should be created in consultation with Ward Members and this should now be happening

·  concern at Officer comments that a reason for refusal on noise nuisance grounds could not be substantiated as only 3 out of 86 properties were affected

·  that the standard wording relating to local employment and training initiatives must be included

·  the need for Members to receive consistent advice as the case to use the site for residential use, despite its allocated use for employment, seemed to differ from that given on a site in Wetherby.  The Panel’s Lead Officer agreed to look into this and report back to Councillor Procter

Members discussed further the lack of affordable housing and viability

issues with the following  ...  view the full minutes text for item 144.

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on a retrospective application for floodlighting and CCTV camera to car park

(report attached)

  Plans and photographs were displayed at the meeting

  Officers presented the report which sought retrospective approval for thirteen 8m high lighting columns with floodlights to the Youth Hub car park on Middleton Road Belle Isle LS10 together with a CCTV camera mounted to a 8m column close to residential properties on Windmill Road

  Members were informed that the application had been brought to Panel at the insistence of the Local Government Ombudsman who had taken up a complaint about the erection of these illegal structures and who had found maladministration

  Officers stated the Council’s Street Lighting Engineer had considered the original lighting scheme which had been erected and considered it to be unacceptable.  Revisions to that had been made which involved disconnecting three of the lights – although the structures remained – and making changes to the lamps to prevent glare to adjacent properties.  Following these amendments, Officers considered the scheme to be acceptable and were recommending approval of the application to Panel

  The Panel heard from an objector who attended the meeting.  Members raised concerns that the no representative from Children’s Services was in attendance

  Members discussed the application and commented on the following matters:

·  the visual impact of the lights

·  the three lights which had been disconnected and that these should be removed

·  the reassurance given to residents by well lit areas

The Panel considered how to proceed and site visit was proposed and

accepted

  RESOLVED -  That determination of the application be deferred for one cycle to enable a site visit to take place; that the Council’s Lighting Engineer should attend the visit along with Members and that until the application has been determined that only the lights on the existing building should be in use

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for the substitution of house types and numbers to plots 134 – 141 and 159 – 214 at Site C to provide 50 houses with revised access roads and landscaping to application 06/05070/RM

(report attached)

  Plans including a comparative plan showing current and previous layouts, photographs and drawings were displayed at the meeting

  Officers presented a report which sought revisions to house types and numbers of plots in respect of a previous Reserved Matters application for a residential development at Swarcliffe Avenue, approved by Panel at its meeting on 5^th July 2007 (minute 36 refers)

  The proposals would see the deletion of 6 flats and 40 two bedroom houses in favour of more three bedroom houses and the introduction of 11 four bedroom houses

  Members were informed there were no proposals to revisit the S106 contributions.  In terms of affordable housing, Officers advised that if this was requested, it would be necessary to revert to the previously approved scheme

  The increased family accommodation in the scheme was welcomed, however the importance of ensuring the works commenced on site as soon as possible was stressed

  In terms of highways matters, assurances were sought that the new roads needed to serve the properties would be developed in tandem with the house building.  The Panel’s Highways representative agreed to take this issue up with colleagues and report back to Ward Members

  RESOLVED -   That the application be granted

Further to minute 130 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 1^st December 2011 where Panel deferred consideration of an application for a two storey primary school with external soft and hard play areas, car parking and service roads, to consider a further report of the Chief Planning Officer

(report attached)

  Further to minute 130 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 1^st December 2011 where Members deferred consideration of an application for a new primary school on the site of the former Braim Wood High School at Wetherby Road, for further information, the Panel considered a further report

Plans, photographs, drawings, graphics and sample materials were displayed at the meeting

  Officers presented the report and outlined the issues raised at the previous meeting relating to site selection and the external appearance of the school with details of the amendments which had been made to the scheme being provided.   With reference to this, Members were informed that the scheme had been re-advertised and that the consultation period for comments was still ongoing

  In terms of car parking, Members’ comments about the need for a dedicated parent drop-off facility had been taken on board and the scheme amended to provide a facility accommodating 36 car parking spaces, including 3 disabled bays, with this being accessed from a new point off Wetherby Road

  If minded to approve the application, it would be necessary to refer this to the Secretary of State as a Departure from the Development Plan

  Members commented on the following matters:

·  the need for conditions to ensure the school did not change the arrangements, e.g. lock the gates

·  that in the event of the traffic proposals associated with the development having a detrimental impact on the area, that a condition be included to address this

·  the need for the proposed materials to be approved

RESOLVED – To approve the application in principle subject to the

expiry of the extended public consultation period and no new material planning issues being raised and refer to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government as a Departure from the Development Plan and to delegate approval to the Chief Planning Officer should the Secretary of State decide not to call in the application for determination and subject to the conditions set out in the submitted report and additional conditions relating to:

·  scheme of local training and employment to be submitted and approved

·  details of accessible pedestrian route

·  visibility splay to drop-off area

·  monitoring and reviewing the car parking scheme with any remedial measures to be submitted and approved

·  submission and approval of materials

Further to minute 129 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 1^st December 2011 where Panel deferred consideration of an application for a single storey one form entry primary school comprising 7 classrooms with associated landscaping, play areas, car parking and access, to consider a further report of the Chief Planning Officer

(report attached)

  Further to minute 129 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 1^st December 2011 where Members deferred consideration of an application for a new primary school on the site of the former Carr Manor High School Stainbeck Lane, for further information, the Panel considered a further report

  Plans, photographs, drawings, graphics and sample materials were displayed at the meeting

  Officers presented the report and outlined the issues raised at the previous meeting relating to highways implications and that in the modelling, highways had taken into account the two other schools sited on this campus

  In terms of car-parking, Members’ comments about the need for a dedicated parent drop-off facility had been taken on board and the scheme amended to provide a facility which accommodated 42 car parking spaces, with a loop system providing access and egress off Stainbeck Lane.  Alongside this facility, a package of off-site highway measures would be implemented to provide traffic management improvements

Members were informed that following these amendments the application had been re-advertised and that the consultation period for comments was still ongoing

  RESOLVED -  To approve the application in principle and delegate approval to the Chief Planning Officer, subject to the expiry of the extended public consultation period and no new planning issues being raised and subject to the conditions set out in the submitted report, the rewording of condition No 17 to include reference to traffic and pedestrian routes plus additional conditions relating to:

·  scheme of local training and employment to be submitted and approved

·  monitoring and reviewing the car parking scheme with any remedial measures to be submitted and approved

·  submission and approval of materials

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer informing Members of the intention to consult on a draft Local Development Order to simplify planning requirements in support of the Aire Valley Leeds Enterprise Zone and seeking  comments on the proposals

The plans in respect of this report will follow

(report attached)

  The Panel considered a report of the Chief Planning Officer providing information on the intention to consult on a draft Local Development Order (LDO) to simplify planning requirements in support of the Aire Valley Leeds Enterprise Zone and seeking comments from Members on the draft.  An extract of a letter received on 5^th January 2011 from the Secretary of State Department of Communities and Local Government relating to the creation of Enterprise Zones and the timescales for these was read out for Members’ information

  Details of the consultations already carried out with Ward Members were provided as were details of the public consultation proposed on the final draft of LDO 2: Extensions, alterations and changes of use of industrial properties

  Councillor Pryke declared a personal interest as a member of Leeds Initiative Board on regeneration which had discussed proposals for an Enterprise Zone for Aire Valley Leeds and proposals for East Leeds

  Officers presented the report and corrected errors at Appendix A and the text version 1.2 of the Local Development Order (2).  These included the need to delete reference to LDO 1 and Solar Panels on the contents page and subsequently re-number the LDO and deletion of the commencement date of 1^st April 2012 at para 5.1

  Members were informed that Leeds had decided to bring the benefits of the Enterprise Zone to a wider area with sites at Cross Green Industrial Park, Stourton and the industrial parts of Hunslet as defined on the plan circulated to Members being included alongside the four Enterprise Zone sites

  Discussion ensued on the appropriateness of such a report being considered by Plans Panel East.  The Chair advised that although the report did not relate to a specific application, occasionally reports were brought to Panel for Members’ comments

  Concerns were also raised that Executive Board had not seen the proposals and neither had the Aire Valley Leeds Board (AVLB); that AVLB Members had strongly held views; whether these views had been incorporated into the LDO and that AVLB should be the lead on this important matter

  The Chair explained that the Aire Valley Leeds Board would be consulted with all comments being forwarded to Executive Board

  A copy of the draft LDO 2 which was included in the submitted report was outlined by Officers

Members commented on the following matters:

·  the extension to the EZ and that this should have been agreed with Members

·  the site at Cross Green and whether there were any exclusions on the developments permitted under the LDO

·  that some zones were split between Wards and that Members required much more information than what was being provided

·  the status of the Council in the LDO and whether it was a statutory consultee or a voluntary one

·  whether applications for housing on the sites fell within the LDO

·  the number of Council owned sites available in the EZ

·  the aim of the LDO, whether this was about a planning approach or relaxing some  ...  view the full minutes text for item 149.

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer and presentation on Reserved Matters proposals for the erection of new Divisional Police Headquarters comprising offices and storage areas, custody suite, multi-level car park and secure yard area

This is a pre-application presentation and no formal decision on the development will be taken, however it is an opportunity for Panel Members to ask questions, raise issues, seek clarification and comment on the proposals at this stage.   There is no opportunity for public speaking about the proposals outlined in the presentation

(report attached)

  (Prior to consideration of this matter, Councillors Gruen and Parker left the meeting)

A model of the proposed development and graphics were displayed at the meeting

  The Panel considered a report and presentation on proposals for the Reserved Matters application for a new Divisional Police Headquarters on Elland Road, following approval of the outline permission considered by Panel at its meeting held on 13^th May 2010 (minute 233 refers)

  The following information was provided:

·  that the Reserved Matters scheme took into account the proximity of the site from the city centre and transport links and it was hoped the development would act as a catalyst for regeneration in the area

·  that many of the components of the proposals were similar to the consented scheme but that the building would be stepped back from the residences on Heath Road, improving that relationship

·  a 1m high plinth would be created along Elland Road

·  that the materials would be pre-cast stone, glass and aluminium which would weather well and give civic status to the building

·  there would be level access to the building and a clearly defined entrance

·  that less TPO trees would be affected by the proposals than the previous scheme but that additional planting would be provided to mitigate against any losses

·  that a BREEAM ‘Excellent’ rating was being sought for the building

·  that the scheme had been designed to take into account changes in the requirements of the police over time

Members commented on the following matters:

·  highways issues, with Members being informed there would be two exit lanes with one being used for emergency exits and that highways officers were satisfied with the proposals

·  the need to keep local residents informed about work being carried out

·  the timescale for building, with this being stated as being 2 years

·  car parking levels, with concerns being raised that only 15 spaces would be provided for visitors and that any overspill visitor parking would not be accommodated elsewhere within the development, for security reasons.  It was noted that the level of car parking had been set at outline, however Panel requested this be reviewed

RESOLVED – To note the report, the presentation and the comments

now made

Thursday 26^th January 2012 at 1.30pm

  Thursday 26^th January 2012 at 1.30pm in the Civic Hall Leeds