Agenda and minutes

North and East Plans Panel
Thursday, 24th October, 2019 1.30 pm

Venue: Civic Hall, Leeds

Contact: Debbie Oldham  Email: debbie.oldham@leeds.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

Site Visits

The site visits earlier in the day were attended by Councillors, Ritchie, Sharpe, Smith, Nash and Midgely.

 

Chairs Comment

The Chair paid tribute and respects to the Late Cllr. Wilkinson who had sadly passed away a few weeks earlier. He said that Cllr. Wilkinson had been a valued member of the North and East Plans Panel in the previous municipal year and had brought commitment and knowledge to the process in supporting his residents.

 

The Chair said that although Cllr. Wilkinson had been in a different political group he had respected his views, his opinions and his commitment to his community. He would be a sad loss to his group colleagues and the community.

 

The Panel paid their respects with a minute silence.

44.

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)

 

Minutes:

There were no appeals against refusal of inspection of documents.

45.

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:-

 

Minutes:

There were no exempt items.

46.

Late 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)

 

Minutes:

There were no late items.

47.

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. 

Minutes:

There were no declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests made.

48.

Apologies for Absence

Minutes:

Apologies have been received from Cllrs. Anderson and Collins.

 

Cllr. Shemilt attended the meeting on behalf of Cllr. Anderson and Cllr. Stephenson attended the meeting as Cllr. Collins’ substitute.

49.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 175 KB

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 26th September 2019.

Minutes:

RESOLVED – That the minutes of the meeting held on 26th September 2019, be approved as a correct record.

50.

19/03390/FU TWO STOREY EXTENSION TO REAR AT 9 THE LAURELS GLEDHOW LEEDS LS8 1PD pdf icon PDF 332 KB

The report of the Chief Planning Officer set out an application for a two storey extension to the rear at 9 The Laurels, Gledhow, Leeds, LS8 1PD.

 

(Report attached)

Minutes:

The report of the Chief Planning Officer set out an application for a two storey extension to the rear at 9 The Laurels, Gledhow, Leeds, LS8 1PD.

 

The application had been brought to the Plans Panel for consideration by Cllr. Wenham, Ward Member for Roundhay. Her reasons were the overbearing nature of the extension being out of character for the street, loss of privacy for occupiers of adjacent properties, parking, and loss of light for adjacent properties.

 

Members had visited the site earlier in the day. Photographs and plans were shown throughout the presentation.

 

The proposal was for a two storey extension to the rear of the property, to allow for a dining room on the ground floor and enlarging a bedroom on the first floor. The extension proposes a pitched roof with a maximum height of 6.40 metres. The single storey element of the proposal would have a lean to roof with a maximum height of 2.80 metres.

 

Bi-folding doors are proposed to the rear elevation from the dining room, with two small windows to the first floor serving the bedrooms. It is also proposed that the existing kitchen door is replaced with a window. It is proposed that all materials will match the existing house.

 

The property is located within a cul-de-sac of about 12 dwellings built in the 1980’s. The dwellings in the area are of a similar style and design. It was noted that numerous properties benefitted from a single storey rear extension.

 

A number of objections had been received and the details were set out at point 6.0 of the submitted report.

 

Members were advised of the following key points:

·  An earlier proposal had been higher however, subsequent negotiations had now seen the extension reduced in height;

·  The ground floor element is proposed to be slightly wider than the first floor part of the extension;

·  The two windows to the first floor will serve a bedroom;

·  Neighbours at number 11 have extended their property with a single storey extension to the rear, The neighbours of number 11 have requested that attention be drawn to the fact that the applicant would be able to look through the roof windows into their dining room;

·  Graphics were shown to provide clarity for Members on the issue of overshadowing explaining the direction of travel of the sun through summer and winter months;

·  Officers were of the view that the proposed extension would not have an impact on neighbours in relation to overshadowing, over massing and bulk, or privacy;

·  Members were advised that the applicant was on holiday but had sent in a submission which was read out to the Panel with these key points noted:

o  No windows directly overlooking neighbours properties;

o  He has a growing family;

o  This proposal would not increase parking in the area;

o  All materials would be in keeping with the property and the area;

o  He had taken the initiative to engage with his neighbours and he was upset  ...  view the full minutes text for item 50.

51.

19/03172/FU PART SINGLE STOREY, PART TWO STOREY EXTENSION WITH THREE AIR CONDITIONING UNITS TO SIDE 152 STAINBECK LANE MEANWOOD LEEDS LS7 2EA pdf icon PDF 1 MB

The report of the Chief Planning Officer requests Members consideration for part single storey, part two storey extension with three air conditioning units to side of 152 Stainbeck Lane, Meanwood, Leeds, LS7 2EA.

 

(Report attached)

Minutes:

Chief Planning Officer’s report requested the Panel give consideration to an application for a part single storey, part two storey extension with three air conditioning units to the front of the property at 152, Stainbeck Lane, Meanwood, Leeds, LS7 2EA.

 

Officers’ recommendation was for refusal and the reasons for refusal were set out in the submitted report

 

Members were informed of the proposal as set out at point 2 of the submitted report. The applicant requires additional bedrooms for his growing family and the storage space and the air conditioning units are in connection with the retail business.

 

Members were advised that the application had received four letters of objection the concerns raised were set out at point 6.3 of the report. Members were advised that the application had been brought to Plans Panel by Cllr. Hamilton who had written in support of the application. Cllr. Hamilton stated that she had looked at the plans and could see no reason for refusal. Her reasons for supporting the application were documented within the report.

 

The Panel were provided with the following key points:

·  Concerns had been raised in relation to the noise from the air conditioning units. It is proposed that the units would be located to the front of the property, they would be screened so not visible from the road;

·  The current air conditioning units are the subject of an enforcement order in relation to noise;

·  There are no design issues with the proposed extension;

·  Residential properties are at least 5 metres away from the proposed extension;

·  Noise from the air conditioning units would probably only be a problem for the resident on the first floor flat who is currently the applicant, and the occupier of the commercial unit. Members were advised that a condition could be added that the occupancy of the first floor flat could be restricted to the owner occupier of the commercial unit;

·  It was noted that 42 Carrholm Road may also suffer some noise issues from the units as it is directly across the road from the premises. A letter of support had been received from the occupiers of number 42 Carrholm Road who were in support of the location of the air conditioning units. The letter also supported the extension highlighting its benefits to the street and the community as it offers a retail service within walking distance of local residents and creates jobs;

·  The proposal set out a mass of walling which would extend the full length of 152 and over dominate the property at 150, it was the view that the extension would cause overshadowing during daylight hours.

 

The resident of 150 Stainbeck Lane was at the meeting and informed the Panel of her concerns:

·  Members attention was drawn to 4.1 of the report which provided relevant history and showed that previous applications had been refused;

·  The extension would cause over dominance and overshadowing to her property. There would be a loss of light to the dining room and the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 51.

52.

19/05155/FU VARIATION OF CONDITION 1 (TEMPORARY TIME LIMIT) OF PLANNING PERMISSION 16/03394/FU FOR THE RETENTION OF 84 CARAVANS IN CONNECTION WITH AN EXISTING SOFT FRUIT FARM STURTON GRANGE FARM RIDGE ROAD MICKLEFIELD LEEDS LS25 4DZ pdf icon PDF 4 MB

 

The report of the Chief Planning Officer requests consideration on variation of condition 1 (temporary time limit) of planning permission 16/03394/FU for the retention of 84 caravans in connection with an existing soft fruit farm Sturton Grange Farm, Ridge Road, Micklefield, Leeds LS25 4DZ.

 

(Report attached)

Minutes:

The report of the Chief Planning Officer set out an application for the variation of condition 1 (temporary time limit) of planning permission16/03394/FU for the retention of 84 caravans in connection with an existing soft fruit farm at Sturton Grange Farm, Ridge Road, Micklefield.

 

Photographs and plans were shown during the presentation.

 

The Panel were informed of the following points:

·  This was a renewal of a permission for 84 caravans used for the accommodation of seasonal workers primarily from the EU. The special circumstances of the permission were set out in the submitted report;

·  The site also has the benefit of an amenity building which includes a shop, internet and social buildings;

·  The fruit farm operates a Spanish style of growing using poly tunnels;

·  Workers have access into Garforth;

·  The permission has been in place since 2008;

·  The caravans have 3 bedrooms, own bathroom and kitchen;

·  From Garforth there is a limited view of the caravan site.

 

Members’ attention was drawn to the fact that since the previous application 3 more caravans have appeared on the site but this would be dealt with by a separate application.

 

In response to Members questions the Panel were provided with the following information:

·  Condition 4 – the caravans would only be occupied by seasonal workers;

·  As set out at 10.9 of the submitted report this permission was time-limited. However, if Members were so minded this could be changed to a longer period and a condition put in place so that if the operation ceases the owner would be required to remove the caravans;

·  The quality of the accommodation within the caravans is not routinely checked. However, Members heard that there is a concord in place under the licensing regime.

 

Members were pleased that this area has provision for growing soft fruit and in this time of climate emergency it was reducing transportation. The Panel wished the fruit farm good luck, especially as they were aware of difficulties in employing seasonal workers.

 

Cllr. Stephenson moved to amend the recommendation to include a caveat to be added in relation to a temporary permission for 6 years. Cllr. Nash seconded the amended, this was then put to the vote.

 

RESOLVED – Members resolved to defer and delegate the grant of planning permission to officers subject to the application first being referred to the Secretary of State for his consideration.

 

Members also resolved that the temporary period for the permission be for 6 years and that the condition be imposed that requires the removal of the caravans from the site upon the cessation of an agricultural use that relies on seasonal workers.

53.

Date and Time of Next Meeting

The next meeting of North and East Plans Panel will be on 28th November 2019, at 1.30pm.

Minutes:

The next meeting of North and East Plans Panel will be on 28th November 2019, at 1.30pm.