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.
There were no declarations.
Apologies for Absence
Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillor B Andersin.
Councillor T Smith was in attendance as substitute.
To confirm as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting held on 30 May 2019
RESOLVED – That the minutes of the meeting held on 30 May 2019 be confirmed as a correct record.
To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an application for 59 dwellings and public open space (partial traffic orders to Swallow Crescent with two parking spaces).
The report of the Chief Planning Officer referred to an application for 59 dwellings and public open space (partial traffic orders to Swallow Crescent with two parking spaces) at the former Worley High School, Swallow Crescent, Wortley which was deferred at the previous Panel meeting.
The application had been deferred and delegated for approval subject to the following:
· Renegotiation to seek provision of 9 affordable units (full policy compliance)
· Discuss design of properties to improve quality of design
· Seek agreement to use euro lock standard locks on all new properties
· Revisit location of front doors shown adjacent to each other on semi-detached dwellings
· Condition 11 – ensure requires EV charging for each parking space
Since the previous Panel meeting, the following amendments had been made to the scheme:
· Use of different brick types.
· The provision of bays on properties with prominent plots.
· Alterations to positioning of doors on semi-detached houses.
· Solar panels on affordable housing – this would be determined by the orientation of the properties.
· Increase in affordable housing from 13.5% to 15%.
· The offer of £30,000 for the residential travel plan had been withdrawn due to the increase in affordable housing.
RESOLVED – That the report be noted.
To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an application for the variation of Condition 31 (Boundary Treatment) of approval 14/02399/RM to retain existing boundary treatments to plots 60-63.
The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an application for retrospective variation of condition 31 (boundary treatment) of approval 14/02399/RM to retain existing boundary treatment to plots 60-63 at land at Fleet Lane, Oulton, Leeds.
Members had visited the site prior to the meeting and 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:
· It was recommended that the application be deferred due to a required amendment to the red line boundary.
· The applicants who had plots 60-63 sought to vary condition 31.
· The boundary was originally planted in 1999 as part of another development.
· The trees in the buffer had been specified as mainly category C which were of little or no value.
· There had been removal of some of the vegetation in 2017 and enforcement action had confirmed breach of condition 31 due to the removal of vegetation to the rear of plots 60 and 61. This had enabled residents of the plots to enlarge their garden space.
· The original condition 31 was vague and difficult to enforce and there was no clear maintenance agreement.
· The original garden depths of plots 60 and 61 were considered to be sub-standard. A compromise had been sought for these plots to retain an additional 4 metres with the rest of the cleared area to be re-planted. There would be a gated access from plot 60 for maintenance.
· There had been objections from neighbours on the loss of the original vegetation, overlooking and noise and disturbance due to closer proximity of gardens.
· It was felt the proposed planting plan would enhance the buffer area and the overall distances between boundaries would normally be considered adequate to prevent harm from overlooking.
· It was recommended to vary condition 31 by replacing it with the following three conditions:
o Retention of the buffer zone and subject to a management plan
o Implementation of planting
o Restriction of access to the buffer zone to maintenance employees.
In response to Members comments and questions, the following was discussed:
o Concern that maintenance of the buffer area was not originally covered by a Section 106 agreement.
o There was a contract with the owner of Plot 60 to guarantee access to the buffer zone. It was understood that this arrangement would be continued in perpetuity.
o Leeds and Yorkshire Housing Association owned plats 61 to 63 and plot 60 had been sold under right to buy subsequent to the submission of the application. The buffer was in the ownership of Leeds and Yorkshire Housing Association.
o If approval was granted it would be subject to having a long term maintenance plan.
o Any non-compliance of the management plan would be subject to enforcement action against the owner of plot 60 or the housing association.
o There was no intention from plots 62 and 63 to extend their gardens.
o Concern that agreement needed to be secured with the owner of ... view the full minutes text for item 11.
To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding a pre-application presentation for commercial development to plots K3/K4
The report of the Chief Planning Officer introduced a pre-application presentation of commercial development to plots K3/K4 at Kirkstall Forge, Leeds.
Members visited the site prior to the meeting and site plans and photographs were displayed throughout the discussion.
The applicant’s representatives addressed the Panel and gave a presentation on the proposals. The following was highlighted:
· Acknowledgement of the Council’s declaration of climate emergency and a review of sustainability in relation to the application.
· Success of Number One, Kirkstall Forge – this was 95% occupied within a year.
· There would be a new area of public realm known as The Stitch, two office buildings and a multi storey car park. It was envisaged that Unit K4 would be used for smaller businesses.
· The proposals would reflect the industrial heritage of the site.
· The Stitch Square would have various uses such as events and markets.
· The proposed buildings would have improved air quality and be a third more energy efficient.
In response to Members comments and questions, the following was discussed:
· Some concern regarding the massing of the car park.
· Further detail would be needed regarding the materials used.
· Concern that there was not enough car parking provision and whether the multi storey car park could be used for community use out of office hours. There was also feeling that car parking should be reduced. Guideline figures suggested 952 spaces and this could be looked at in more detail when the application is submitted.
· There would be further consideration to the cladding finish of the car park as the application was progressed.
· Predicted energy needs of the development – information on this would be available in more detail at the planning application stage.
· Cycling facilities – there would be cycle storage and showering facilities within the car park building.
· Landscaping plans for the Stitch Square.
· Whether a wind modelling study would be required – further analysis would be carried out.
· Landscaping should match the scale of the development and possible introduction of raised lawns and green walls.
RESOLVED – That the presentation and discussion be noted.
Date and Time of Next Meeting
Thursday, 1 August 2019 at 1.30 p.m.
Thursday, 1 August at 1.30 p.m.