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. 

There were no declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests.

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillor D Ragan.  Councillor P Gruen was in attendance as substitute.

To confirm as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting held on 5 September 2019

RESOLVED – That the minutes of the meeting held on 5 September 2019 be confirmed as a correct record.

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an application for the demolition of existing dwellings and construction of 70 dwellings and associated infrastructure.

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an application for the demolition of existing dwellings and the construction of 70 dwellings and associated infrastructure on land at Sugar Hill Close, Oulton Drive, Wordsworth Drive, Oulton Leeds.

The application had been considered at the meeting of the South and West plans Panel held in May 2019 when it had been deferred for the following:

• More detail around design quality and layout.
• Assessment  of some of the proposed garden sizes /depths
• More information on the impact on the existing community including from the developer on the mitigation they have considered e.g.  timescales/phasing  for redevelopment
• More consideration of the overall effect in sustainability terms e.g. energy costs/ savings involved in demolition and rebuild compared to refurbishment.
• Review of the actual housing mix need in the area (is there need for as many 4 bed houses here?)
• More information of the heritage value and significance of the existing houses

The Chair reported that Panel Members had received additional correspondence from objectors in the lead up to the meeting.  This information had been submitted to officers and would be summarised as part of the presentation of the application.

The following was highlighted in relation to the application:

·  Additional representations from objectors included the following:

o  There had been a further 46 objections, a paper petition with 882 signatures and an online petition with 2,513 signatures.

o  The existing properties could be renovated to achieve better energy ratings.

o  Refurbishment of the existing properties would be a more environmentally friendly option.

o  There was no solar energy provision.

o  New build would create more waste/

o  The equality impact assessment findings had not been shared with residents.

o  The proposed houses would be smaller than existing houses.

o  There had not been sufficient notice for this meeting.

o  There had been no response with regard to the impact on residents and information requested last time the application was considered had not been provided.

·  The proposals would see the demolition of 71 existing properties with the development of 70 new properties and infrastructure.

·  Changes to the proposals since the application was previously considered included repositioning of houses for improved views, additional hedge planting, significant changes to appearance including different materials and darker cladding and a mix of hipped and gable roofs.

·  There would be wheelchair accessible properties and all properties met or exceeded space standards.

·  Affordable housing would be ‘pepper-potted’ throughout the site.

·  There had been changes to layout to prevent any irregular shaped gardens. 14% of gardens would be marginally smaller than guideline sizes but this was mitigated by extending the depth and width.  These smaller garden sizes were not considered to be harmful to residential amenity.

·  The revised landscape plan included additional tree planting.

·  With regard to impact on community and whether Leeds City Council had discharged its duty under the public sector equality duty, it was reported that for those on regulated and assured tenancies there was a requirement on the landlord to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 37.

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding a retrospective application for the variation of condition 9 (Rockwood Road ginnel) of approval 08/04771/RM to open the gate 30 minutes prior to start of school day and close 15 minutes after start of school day; open 15 minutes prior to end of school day and close 75 minutes after end of school day.

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an application for the variation of condition 9 (Rockwood Road ginnel) of approval 08/04771/RM to open the gate 30 minutes prior to the start of the school day and close 15 minutes after the start of school day; open 15 minutes prior to end of school day and close 75 minutes after end of school day.

Following deferral of the application at the previous Panel meeting, there had been a visit to the site to see the traffic situation at the end of the school day.

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

The following was highlighted in relation to the application:

• The ginnel gave a pedestrian link from the school to Rockwood Road and existing arrangements allowed the gate to the ginnel to be open 30 minutes prior to start and finish times and 30 minutes after.  The gate was to remain locked at all other times.

·  The proposed amended times sought were for gates at the ginnel to be opened from 8:00 to 8:45 on a morning which was 15 minutes shorter than currently allowed. 

·  On Monday, Wednesday and Friday, the school finished at 15:00 with extra activities taking place until 16:00.  It was proposed that the gate be opened from 14:45 to 16:15.

·  On Tuesday and Thursday, the school finished at 14:30 with extra activities taking place until 15:30.  It was proposed that the gate be opened from 14:15 until 16:15.

·  The gate was currently being used for these extended periods which had led to an increase in local concerns and complaints relating to highways safety and nuisance.

·  The numbers using the gates after the peak period would be minimal.  Refusal of the application and compliance with the original permission would not reduce the problems encountered at peak periods.

·  Planning officers had visited the site at peak times and the situation was described as chaotic.  Cars parked close to the ginnel, blocked driveways and made dangerous manoeuvres often mounting pavements.

·  The area surrounding the ginnel was residential in nature.

·  The main vehicular entrance to the school was directly off the ring road where there was high amounts of traffic.

·  A substantial amount of pupils attending the school came from outside the area and this access was more convenient and attracted a large amount of traffic.

·  Emergency traffic regulation orders to help alleviate the problems and had been partly successful with 155 tickets issued since September 2017.

·  The entrance on Rockwood Rood prevented traffic from using the ring road.  Use of the ring road entrance caused a 3.85 mile diversion.  This was exacerbated as traffic could only turn in one direction on exiting.  There was concern that drivers may carry out an illegal turn out on to the ring road if forced to use this entrance.

·  The school had provided further information with regard to the difficulties of using the ring road, and that the peak period of problems on Rockwood Road  ...  view the full minutes text for item 38.

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding a reserved matters application for residential development of 21 dwellings

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented a reserved matters application for a residential development of 21 dwellings at South Park Mills, Hare Lane, Pudsey.

Members of the Panel had 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 was highlighted in relation to the application:

·  Prior to the meeting there had been a suggestion that there were inaccuracies with regard to distances specified in the report.  These had since been checked and shown to be correct.  There was also a query regarding the removal of trees – there would be 5 removed in total, 4 for arboriculture reasons and 1 for development purposes.  There would be an updated arboriculture report.

·  The application was brought to Panel regarding concerns on residential amenity and highway safety.

·  The outline approval had been for up to 21 units and included imps to Hare lane, landscape improvements and provision of affordable housing

·  The site was currently occupied by industrial buildings and hard standings.

·  Access to the site was shown – Hare Lane was a narrow non-adopted road.

·  There would be greenbelt buffers to three sides of the site.

·  The proposed layout was shown.  There would be a mix of 2 storey and 2.5 storey detached houses.

·  The site was allocated for housing in the site allocation plan.

·  The existing terrace of houses was 11.5 metres away at the nearest point and there was no direct view to the side elevations.

·  There would be a public open space to the south of the site.

·  There had been concerns of noise due to traffic movements.  It was considered that this would be less than the current industrial uses.

·  Concerns regarding the use of Hare Lane.  Highways were satisfied that this was safe and usage would be lower than the existing industrial use.

·  Section 106 agreement included a condition survey of the highways.

·  There would be 2 parking spaces for each property including electric vehicle charging for each dwelling.

·  There would be an additional condition for 10% renewable energy and verifications statement for this upon completion.

·  The application was recommended for approval.

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

·  Concern that policies EN1 and EN2 would not be satisfied.

·  Concern regarding the narrowness and steepness of Hare Lane and its condition following on site construction.  It was reported that this would be surveyed prior to construction and at least returned to its previous condition following construction under the Section 106 agreement but this would not include any improvement.

·  The applicant’s representative confirmed that Hare Lane would be surveyed prior to demolition should the application be approved.

·  Concern that the site was not sustainable and had poor access.  It was suggested that it would be in the interests of the developer to resurface the road.  It was reported that this would take the agreement of all landowners.

·  Concern that the design was uninspired with standard style houses  ...  view the full minutes text for item 39.

Thursday, 7 November 2019 at 1.30 p.m.

Thursday, 7 November 2019 at 1.30 p.m.