Agenda and minutes

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. 

With regard to Agenda Item 8 – Leeds Beckett University, Headingley Campus; Councillor Bentley informed the Panel that he had been involved in discussion with the applicant but there was no case of pre-determination and he would be considering the application with an open mind.

Councillor Davey declared a pecuniary interest in Agenda Item 11 – 27 Creskeld Lane, Bramhope, Leeds as he was the applicant.  He left the meeting during the discussion and voting on this item.

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillor S Arif, D Congreve and M Coulson.

Councillors F Venner and N Walshaw were in attendance as substitutes.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 8 February 2018 as a correct record.

RESOLVED – That the minutes of the meeting held on 8 February 2018 be confirmed as a correct record.

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an application for the change of use of a dwelling into a 4 bedroom house of multiple occupancy (Class Use C4)

The report of the Chief Planning Officer informed of an appeal decision following the decision of the Panel to refuse permission for the change of use of a dwelling house into a four bedroom House in Multiple Occupation at 20 Conference Road, Armley, Leeds.

The application was considered at Panel in August 2017 when it was refused for the following reasons:

‘The proposals will result in a concentration of HMOs within the street and adjacent streets causing harm to the character of the area; the loss of community cohesion; the lossof a family house and an increase in the demand for on street parking contrary to Policy H6 of the Core Strategy, Policy GP5 of the UDP and paragraph 17 of the NPPF’.

The Inspector identified the following main issues:

·  Housing balance in the local area

·  Character of the surrounding area

·  Highway safety and parking

He did not support the Panel view and felt that there was not a high concentration of HMOs in the immediate area.  He also acknowledged that there were no proposed external changes to the property and use would not be dissimilar to that of a property in family occupation.  There was also no evidence to indicate that the change of use would create any highways or parking problems.

RESOLVED – That the appeal decision be noted.

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an application for the demolition of existing teaching building and surface car park, and development of a teaching and research building, with health clinics, multi-purpose exercise, an indoor 60m athletics track, campus general teaching, ancillary offices, café and public space.

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an application for the demolition of an existing teaching building and surface car park and development of a teaching and research building, with health clinics, multi-purpose exercise, an indoor 60m athletics track, campus general teaching, ancillary offices and a café and public space at Leeds Beckett University, Headingley Campus, West Park.

Members visited the site prior to the meeting and site plans and photographs were displayed and referred to throughout the discussion of the application.

The following issues were highlighted in relation to the application:

·  The new building would be located to the west of the site and would maintain distances between other key buildings.

·  Details of landscaping including tree planting and the public realm area.

·  There had been objections from local residents and Ward Councillors.  Loss of car parking was a concern and the impact that this would have on neighbouring streets.  Footpath and cycle routes needed to be upgraded.

·  It was considered that parking arrangements would be sufficient with 131 spaces when works were completed.

·  The University had offered a sum of £70k to be held by the Council for future works that may be needed due to issues with car parking.

·  There had not been any objection to the building or upgrading of facilities at the site.

·  The application was recommended for approval.

Members supported the application but still had concerns regarding parking.  The Panel heard from a representative of the University.  It was acknowledged that there were historical problems with parking in the area and the Panel was informed that a liaison group had been set up with local resident associations.  The University was committed to solving problems with parking in the area and had introduced a shuttle bus service to alleviate some of the problems.  Further suggestions were made that the parking fees at the campus could be reduced or scrapped and that Headingley Stadium be approached regarding the use of overspill parking facilities.

In response to comments and questions, it was reported that liaison with residents could be included in the condition for the Car Park Management Plan and the standard approach for local employment opportunities during the construction phase be taken.

RESOLVED – That approval be deferred and delegated to the Chief Planning Officer subject to conditions outlined in the report and the completion of a legal agreement within 3 months from the date of resolution unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Chief Planning Officer, to include the following obligations:

·  A contribution towards future highways infrastructure and other measures necessary in the locality to be used in the event that the development results in adverse highways impacts in the ten years following first use of the development - £70,000

·  Travel Plan Obligations and Monitoring Fee - £3,157

Ward Members for Kirkstall and Weetwood wards to be consulted on Heads of Terms of Agreement related to Highways matters.  Due to short timescales involved, Panel accepted that if there was any dispute, to avoid delay, the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 90.

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planing Officer regarding an application for a new build residential care home.

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an application for a new build residential care home on land at the former Musgrave Court Residential Care Home, Crawshaw Road, Pudsey.

Members visited the site when the application was originally reported to Panel in January 2018 and subsequently deferred to allow for further negotiation with regard to the massing and dominance of the size of the building.  Site plans and photographs were displayed and referred to throughout the discussion of the application.

Further issues highlighted in relation to the application included the following:

·  The roof height of the proposed building had been reduced.

·  Further on-site parking space had been made available.

·  Objections to the application – these included the number of bedrooms and the overall size of the home.  It was felt something smaller would be more appropriate and in keeping with the conservation area.

·  The new height of the proposed building was commensurate with surrounding two storey buildings.

·  It was not considered that there would be any light pollution to existing properties.

·  There would be conditions for the construction management plan.

·  The application was recommended for approval.

The Panel was informed that under the public speaking protocol for Plans Panels that applicants and objectors were only able to address the Panel on one occasion unless there was a significant change to the proposals.  As the proposals had only seen a reduction in height and massing it was felt that it was not necessary to hear from those who had made representations.

Members supported the amendments to the original proposal and felt that the necessary measures had been taken to satisfy concerns addressed at the meeting in January 2018.

RESOLVED – That the application be approved as per the officer recommendation and subject to conditions outlined in the report.

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an application for the installation of biomass hoppers to rear of garage with associated flues; solar panels to roof of garage and extension of garage to enclose fuel storage hoppers.

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an application regarding a part retrospective application for the installation of biomass hoppers to the rear of the garage with associated flues; solar panels to roof of garage and extension of garage to enclose fuel storage hoppers at Throstle Nest Villa, New Road Side, Horsforth.

Members visited the site prior to consideration of the application in October 2017 when it was deferred to allow for further negotiation on flue arrangements to take any smoke and fumes away from neighbouring properties.

Site plans and photographs were displayed and referred to throughout the discussion of the application.

Further issues highlighted included the following:

·  Further explorations had not found a demonstrably better way ro deal with emissions via the means of altering the flue system.

·  The boiler system had been licensed by DEFRA and inspected by Building Control and found to be fully compliant with building regulations.

·  An air quality assessment had not shown a breach of national air quality objectives.

·  Further representations had been received in objection to the application.

·  The application was recommended for approval.

In response to Members comments and questions, the following was discussed:

·  It was possible to increase the height of the flues but it was not known as to whether this would make a difference.

·  Moving the boilers – this was considered but would not demonstrates that it would improve matters.

·  There had been alterations to the system which would increase the initial heat when the boilers were first started and this would help with the dispersal of smoke and emissions.

·  The Panel heard from an Environmental Health representative.  It was reported that assessments for air quality and noise had been carried out and had only shown a negligible impact and not what would be considered to be a statutory nuisance.  Further to suggestions regarding the heightening of the flues, it was reported that this could actually have a detrimental effect on how the smoke as dispersed.  The smoke and odour was only evident for a couple of minutes when the boilers were first started up.

·  Should there be an evident problem with excessive smoke and odour then enforcement could be taken.

·  Some Members continued to express a level of concern that heightening of the flues should have been tried.

RESOLVED – That the application be approved as per the officer recommendation and conditions outlined in the report.

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planing Officer regarding an application for new gates to front.

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an application for the new gates to the front of the property at 27 Creskeld Lane, Bramhope Leeds.

Members visited the site prior to the meeting and site photographs were displayed and referred to throughout the discussion of the application.

Members were informed that the application had been referred to Panel as it had been made by an Elected Member of Leeds City Council.

Further to a representation made by Arthington Parish Council, it was reported that there had been a revision to the original proposals for a solid wooden gate and the application was recommended for approval.

RESOLVED – That the application be approved as per the officer recommendation

.

Thursday, 12^th April at 1.30 p.m.

Thursday, 12 April 2018 at 1.30 p.m.