Venue: Civic Hall, Leeds
Contact: Debbie Oldham Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
The site visits earlier in the day were attended by Cllrs. Ritchie, Jenkins, Nash, Midgley, Smith, Collins, Latty, and Hamilton.
Appeals Against Refusal of Inspection of Documents
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.
Exempt Information - Possible Exclusion of the Press and Public
1 To highlight reports or appendices which officers have identified as containing exempt information, and where officers consider that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information, for the reasons outlined in the report.
2 To consider whether or not to accept the officers recommendation in respect of the above information.
3 If so, to formally pass the following resolution:-
RESOLVED – That the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following parts of the agenda designated as containing exempt information on the grounds that it is likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, that if members of the press and public were present there would be disclosure to them of exempt information, as follows:-
There were exempt items.
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 late items.
Declarations of Disclosable Pecuniary Interests
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.
No declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests were made.
Apologies for Absence
Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Grahame, Sharpe and Seary.
The following Councillors were in attendance at the meeting as substitutes:
Cllr. Sharon Hamilton for Cllr. Grahame
Cllr. G Latty for Cllr. Seary
Cllr. G Almas for Cllr. Sharpe. It was noted that Cllr. Almas was unable to attend until 2pm.
To confirm as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting held on 20 June 2019.
RESOLVED – That the minutes of the meeting held on 20th June 2019, be approved as a correct record.
It was noted that Cllr. Collins had indicated that she would be referring to issues in minute 7 in relation to Leeds Design Guide on private roads.
To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an application for a greenkeeping facility (storage/workshop) and yard with ancillary office and sensor activated emergency lighting attached to proposed building
The report of the Chief Planning Officer set out an application for greenkeeping facilities (storage/workshop) and yard, with ancillary office and sensor activated emergency lighting attached to proposed building at Moortown Golf Club, Harrogate Road, Moortown, Leeds.
Members had attended a site visit earlier in the day, photographs and plans were shown throughout the presentation.
Members were advised of the following points:
· This was to be an additional building for the use of greenkeeping;
· Hard standing was to be created and access would remain via across The Fairway;
· Negotiations had taken place with an agreement to remove the proposed floodlights but to keep emergency lighting;
· The proposal was for a large shed looking building which would be clad in green so that it blended into the surroundings;
· There was a generous distance between the proposed building and residential properties;
· The proposed building was to be used for workshop, storage, office space and washrooms;
· The entrance off the Fairway would be accessed by staff only;
· Paragraph 3.2 was highlighted in relation to tree preservation that related to the main golf course and not the application site.
Mr Banks a local resident attended the meeting and spoke against the recommendation informing the Members of the following points:
· There had been 75 objections not 38 as stated in the report;
· The woodland area was identified by DEFRA who had made an inventory of the trees and that paragraph 3.2 did not cover the protected trees;
· There are many species located within that area such as bats, hedgehogs and deer. Although, it was noted that no surveys had been taken on species in the area;
· The community are subject to noise from machinery;
· Lack of privacy as the buildings would be close to residential dwellings;
· The proposed building is over large for the site;
· The water from drains and springs seems to be leaking into residential gardens since the trees were cleared;
· The Himalayan Balsam from the Club has now started invading the residential gardens;
· Herbicide is used to try and clear it from the club which then makes its way into the local springs causing ecological damage;
Responding to Members questions Mr Banks provided the following comments:
· There had been no consultation with residents;
· There was already planning permission for a greenkeeper building that was already on site but it was the view of Mr Banks the club did not want to use this building it as it had asbestos and would be costly to remove it;
Mr Rishworth, Club Secretary and Mr Robinson, Course Manager attended the meeting providing information and responding to Members questions on the following points:
· No increase in activity;
· No increase in access;
· No change in working styles;
· Machinery is currently double parked or left in the open which is why they need the extra building;
· 2 trees had to be removed in December 2017, but these trees were diseased;
· Some shrub land had been removed;
· Work alongside DEFRA and there is a moorland management ... view the full minutes text for item 19.
To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an application for a detached dwelling to garden area.
The report of the Chief Planning Officer requested Members consideration on an outline application for detached dwelling to side garden at 9 Manor Park, Scarcroft, Leeds.
The application had been referred to the Panel at the request of ward member Cllr. Stephenson.
The Panel was informed of a change to the recommendation to defer and delegate in order for the red line to be changed to include the private road and Certificate B to be signed and notice served on all owners of the private road. This was to enable the Council to impose the planning condition requiring a condition survey of the road.
It was also noted that an additional representation had been received from a neighbour raising concerns over drainage.
Members had attended a site visit earlier in the day. Photographs and plans were shown throughout the presentation and during discussions.
Members were advised of the following points:
· This site is not within a conservation area although to the rear there is woodland and it is green belt;
· The area is residential;
· The application seeks 1 detached dwelling but is submitted in outline only with all matters reserved. However, indicative plans suggest the dwelling would be two storeys with 4 to 5 bedrooms, with a pitched roof which is compatible with the local area;
· Officers were sceptical that the site could accommodate 4 to 5 bedroom dwelling, however, this could be controlled through reserved matters;
· The proposal was for the removal of the conservatory to the side of the current dwelling to allow more space for the development;
· Trees on the site would need to be removed for the development, but there is woodland to the rear of the site, beyond the red line boundary;
· Manor Park has seen previous applications for dwellings which have been approved;
· Page 41 was highlighted which provided information on an application in the area which had recently been refused;
· The area has houses of different designs and size which make up the character of the area;
· Manor Park is an un-adopted road, Members were reminded of the policy which covers un-adopted roads but in this instance an additional dwelling was not considered to create a danger to highway safety.
The resident of number 11 Manor Park attended the meeting and provided the Panel with the following information:
· They had resided at 11 Manor Park for 15 years;
· The development would detract from the character of the area;
· Impact on neighbouring properties;
· Bats nest at 9 Manor Park;
· Deer within the greenbelt to the rear of the properties;
· Street scene would look cramped;
· Contrary to Neighbourhood Plan;
· A similar application had been turned down at Mellendean a property close by;
· Highway safety, there are no street lights, visitors cars park near bend;
· Visitors to the racing stud nearby use Manor Park for parking;
· Drains are old and prone to flood risk;
· Tree preservation order.
In response to Members comments and questions the following was discussed:
· Design Guide for un-adopted roads;
· Character ... view the full minutes text for item 20.
To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an application for an extension to side including alterations to frontage and replacement windows of existing cinema.
The report of the Chief Planning Officer set out an application for an extension to side including alterations to frontage and replacement windows of existing cinema at Rodney Cinema, Caxton Street, Wetherby, LS22 6RY.
The Panel was advised that since the Panel Papers had been published amended plans had been received and the side elevation of the cinema would now be offset from the adjacent neighbouring property at no. 17 Crossley Street by 1.5m for the full length of the extension.
Members had visited the site earlier in the day where changes to the plans had been explained. Photographs and plans were shown throughout the presentation and during discussions.
Members were informed of the following points:
· The extension is part of a wider plan to refurbish the cinema, splitting the auditorium into two to provide two screens to offer wider film choice;
· Cllr. Lamb had requested that the application be brought to Panel for consideration as he had a number of concerns including design;
· The site is within the conservation area and has been identified as a positive building with the conservation area;
· The proposal is for a single storey extension which would comprise of entrance with accessible ramp, toilet facilities, and café/bar area;
· The current entrance to be block up would be used as staff area and offices;
· This is an original art deco cinema and it is proposed that all external features would remain including the arches;
· The bin store would be to the side of the new extension;
· A lantern style roof is proposed on the extension;
· Permit only parking in the area and there are currently no issues;
· The rear door to be of obscure glaze to restrict overlooking onto neighbouring properties;
· The applicant has worked with planning officers and listened to the comments of the residents;
· The height of the extension has been lowered and the materials altered but still has a contemporary design;
· The refurbishment and extension are to ensure that the future of the cinema is sustainable and accessible to all;
· Opening hours of the café/bar can be controlled by conditions.
Cllr. Lamb and Mr Chesterfield, Architectural Caseworker for the Cinema Association attended the meeting and provided the following points to the Panel:
· This had been a tricky application from start to finish as opinion was divided in Wetherby;
· The community want a cinema in Wetherby that will do well and be sustainable;
· The new owners were praised for their engagement with the residents and that they had taken on the ideas put forward;
· This venture has been bought as a profitable business, the previous owners did have concerns in relation to two screens;
· Concerns had been raised in relation to the café/bar and that this element of the business would take over from the cinema;
· In splitting the auditorium there would be 31 fewer seats;
· A suggestion for limiting the sale of alcohol be considered and a closing time of 10:30pm was proposed;
· The community want to protect the history of the ... view the full minutes text for item 21.
To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding a retrospective application for the housing of animals within a detached agricultural building.
The report of the Chief Planning Officer set out a retrospective application for the housing of animals within a detached agricultural building at Swillington Organic Farm, Coach Road, Wakefield Road, Swillington, Leeds, LS26 8QA.
An application had been presented to North and East Plans Panel on 5th July 2018, where it was resolved to grant planning permission in accordance with the recommendation (12 month temporary permission for the use of the building for the housing of animals). In addition Members requested that:
· Officers investigate whether the car parking area constitutes a breach of planning control, and
· Officers to give consideration, in the event that a permanent permission is recommended to be granted, whether a condition can be imposed removing some or all of the agricultural permitted development rights.
Members were advised that the temporary period of 12 months had now ended and that the applicant was seeking to allow the building to permanently house animals. Members were also advised that the structure lies close to a listed building and the applicant is leasing land from St Aidan’s Trust, which is managed by Leeds City Council, and as such it was considered appropriate to report back to Plans Panel for a determination.
Members were provided with a brief overview of the application with photographs and plans shown throughout the presentation and during discussions.
It was noted that one of the main issues was the housing of animals in the barn due to noise complaints from the owner of the listed residential building close by.
Members were advised that agricultural land holdings do have general permitted development rights a document which grants planning consent nationwide subject to certain conditions and limitations. Members note that the barn was erected under this right.
One of the restrictions placed on use of a barn is that if it is within 400m of a residential property that’s not part of the farm unit it cannot be used to house animals.
The Panel was advised that there had been enforcement cases raised in 2017/2018, saying that animals were being housed permanently in the barn and that these were causing a noise nuisance to the residential property. It was explained that this had been the reason why a 12 month temporary permission had been granted to try and ascertain noise levels and if there was harm to the neighbour.
Members noted that the way in which the barn had been used over the past 12 months had not generated any noise complaints.
It was noted that negotiations had taken place with the applicant’s agent to try and move this application forward. It was explained that this was the reason for the condition set out within the submitted report. Members were made aware that the applicant was unhappy with the proposed condition saying that the business could not operate with the condition placed on it.
Members heard that an email had been received from the agent after the publication of the agenda the salient points of ... view the full minutes text for item 22.
Date and Time of Next Meeting
Thursday, 22 August 2019 at 1.30 p.m.
The next meeting of the North and East Plans Panel will be on Thursday 22nd August at 1.30pm.