Agenda and minutes

Councillors Campbell, Taylor, Garvani, Bithell, L Buckley, Manaka and Rontree attended the site visit earlier in the day.

It was noted that Councillor Smith made best efforts to attend the site visit, but unfortunately could not make it due to being stuck in traffic.

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.

There were no exempt items.

There were no formal late items.

To disclose or draw attention to any interests in accordance with Leeds City Council’s ‘Councillor Code of Conduct’.

No interests were raised.

No apologies were received.

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an application which seeks full planning permission for a first-floor, side/rear extension which sits above part of the existing single storey side/rear extension currently in place at 13 Farfield Avenue, Farsley, Pudsey, LS28 5HD.

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an application for a first-floor side and rear extension at 13 Farfield Avenue, Farsley, Pudsey, LS28 5HD.

Photographs and slides were shown throughout the officer presentation, and the following information was provided:

·  The application is submitted in a personal capacity, by or on behalf of Members, Directors or any other officer who carries out development management functions.

·  The dwelling is not in a Conservation Area nor is it a Listed Building. There are also no tree preservation orders on or abutting the site.

·  The property affords a single storey wrap around side/rear extension at present which is to be retained.

·  The topographical feature is consistent among neighbouring properties and across the rear boundary are further residential dwellings.

·  The property is set at a higher ground level than the adjacent property at No.11 causing the rear elevation to be higher than its frontage.

·  There are no extensions on the adjoining neighbour property.

·  The dwelling retains good distances to all boundaries and the proposal will create an additional 2 bedrooms. The property is set back and there is no over-looking or harmful over-dominance.

·  All the proposed materials match the existing streetscape.

·  The application is considered compliant in terms of planning policies.

Further to clarity regarding paragraph 23 of the submitted report, officers confirmed that the phrase ‘terracing’ is when semi-detached properties are removing the gap between the dwellings.

Upon voting, a motion was put forward to move the officer recommendation. This was moved and seconded. Therefore, it was unanimously

RESOLVED – To grant planning permission.

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an application under S106A for the modification or discharge of Planning Obligations pursuant to Section 106A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to vary the existing S106 Agreement to application 18/01501/OT to remove the build to rent and PRS covenants at Former Airedale Mills, Moss Bridge Works, Town Street, Rodley, Leeds, LS13 1HP.

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an application under S106A for the modification or discharge of Planning Obligations pursuant to Section 106A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to vary the existing S106 Agreement to application 18/01501/OT to remove the build to rent and PRS covenants at Former Airedale Mills, Moss Bridge Works, Town Street, Rodley, Leeds, LS13 1HP.

Photographs and slides were shown throughout the officer presentation, and the following information was provided:

·  The application is referred to Panel due to the significance of the proposal to vary an existing S106. The existing S106 Agreement was completed on 01/07/2019 for planning application 18/01501/OT.

·  Members were provided with some brief history of the site, as previously discussed at the Panel meeting held on Thursday, 26^th October 2023.

·  The proposal seeks to remove the standard restrictions within the current S106 Agreement, paragraph 2 of the First Schedule of the Deed of Variation, as the applicant is seeking flexibility to provide standard affordable housing provision of 15%, in line with the approved scheme or additional affordable housing via a scheme which would deliver 100% affordable housing.

·  The applicant will continue to provide 15%, and this is considered policy compliant. Further to this, officers have suggested a clause to the applicant in that confirmation of the level of provision will be provided.

Further to questions from Panel Members, the following was confirmed by officers:

·  A clause has been suggested to the applicants, in that, confirmation be provided to the Local Planning Authority the level of affordable housing provision that will be provided; prior to commencement with the intention of proceeding with the scheme.

·  There are recent reports of issues with the swing bridge and the provision of the bridge remains in the extant planning permission that has already been provided and has been signed off by engineers.

·  The applicant will either provide 15% affordable housing or 100%. There will not be a ‘floating’ figure in-between that. Both options provide policy compliant schemes.

Further to comments from Panel Members, the following was relayed:

·  The importance of ensuring any variations with the application are brought back to a Plans Panel for consideration.

·  Concerns over the safety of the swing bridge and its operation, as well as the impact on the nature reserve.

·  To consider including more socially rented properties in the future.

Upon voting, a motion was put forward to move the officer recommendation. This was moved and seconded and therefore it was

RESOLVED – To grant permission.

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an Outline Planning Application for the erection of nine dwellings, with some matters reserved except for access at Field off Westerton Road, Tingley, WF3 1AE.

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented a report for an Outline Planning Application for the erection of nine dwellings, with some matters reserved except for access at Field Off Westerton Road, Tingley, WF3 1AE.

Photographs and slides were shown throughout the officer presentation, and the following information was provided:

·  The development will be accessed off the new road and junction from Westerton Road (currently being constructed) serving part of the adjacent Redrow Homes development, the latter being built out pursuant to SAP allocations HG2-168 and HG2-169, under outline planning permissions references 17/08262/OT (for up to 299 dwellings) and 21/07156/RM (for 289 dwellings).

·  The site is a small agricultural piece of land that forms part of a wider area of open land that sits within the built-up area of West Ardsley. The application site is within designated land under saved UDP Policy N11, which restricts uses within the land to open uses only, such as agriculture or recreation.

·  The current proposal for up to 9 dwellings is an outline planning application, seeking to establish the principle of residential development in that location. It does not include its design, layout, appearance of houses etc.

·  The application site was not put forward as a site for SAP allocations at the time the other parcels of land were. Only open land uses are permitted on the application site. The proposal for residential development does not come into the use of UDP Policy N11 and it is considered to impact on the openness and character of the area. Therefore, officers are putting forward a recommendation to refuse the application.

·  Additional cars will also be using the access point, creating access and highway safety issues.

The applicant and representatives were invited to make representation. The following was highlighted:

·  Language used refers to Greenbelt determination rather than small windfall sites.

·  There is confusion regarding Policy N11, and Panel Members were asked to defer the matter.

·  Officers previously advised that the application would be presented at Plans Panel with a recommendation of approval, until 13^th October where the applicant was advised that they had investigated Policy N11 in greater detail and discussed with landscape and ecology colleagues and therefore the recommendation changed to refusal. Further to discussions with senior landscape and ecology officers, they also presented support for the application.

·  The land will be surrounded with new and future development and there are no long-distance views to be protected because of such development.

·  There is a benefit in approving a small windfall site rather than a field full of houses.

Further to a question regarding affordable housing, it was confirmed that there is no requirement to provide affordable housing on a proposal for 9 dwellings.

Further to questions to officers, the following information was confirmed:

·  Officers cannot answer whether the parcel of land would have been determined as part of the SAP process in determining land. It was reiterated that the Local Planning Authority do have an allocated SAP and Core Strategy and forms part  ...  view the full minutes text for item 70.

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an application for residential development of 56 no. dwellings with associated landscaping and infrastructure at Land Off Bradford Road East Ardsley.

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an application for a residential development comprising of 56 no. dwellings with associated landscaping and infrastructure at Land Off Bradford Road East Ardsley.

Photographs and slides were shown throughout the officer presentation, and the following information was provided:

·  The application relates to a greenfield site that  is currently allocated for a new school in the Site Allocations Plan (SAP) under SAP Ref: HG5-8 which is located in the Outer South West Housing Market Characteristic Area (HMCA).

·  The application proposes a development of 56 new dwellings.

·  The application is a full planning application seeking permission for all details and follows the approval of detail planning reference 17/04308 which provided consent for 299 dwellings on the adjacent land by the same applicant.

·  To the south-east of the site is where the listed St. Michael’s Church is visible above some of the existing houses and tree canopies.

·  The application site is bound to the west by Bradford Road, with residential properties along Woodlands Drive. The Copse and Woodlands Close adjoining the sites southern boundary.

·  There is a good mixture of parking to the front of properties and drives provided.

·  The dwellings are arranged off a single spine road with a small cul-de-sac at the mid-point and terminating in short private drives towards the eastern end.

·  The area to the front of the application site is public open land.

·  The development does not over-dominate neighbouring sites.

·  Officers provided an overview of the different house-types to be provided on-site as well as confirmation that there is a single bungalow proposed.

Councillor Foster attended the Panel meeting and provided the following information:

·  The council originally considered the site for a new school, and this highlights a geographical importance for East Ardsley.

·  There has been no effort to establish a community space in East Ardsley for its residents.

·  Most people must use their car to get places and there is already a failing public transport system.

·  It is believed that there is a drive to install high value properties rather than closing the gap of deprivation and providing affordable housing.

·  The application site has education land uses until 2028 and there is a legal obligation to allow an application to come forth for that need.

·  The land has significance importance to the community, and it is an ideal school location.

The applicant informed the Panel, providing the following information:

·  Paragraph 72 of the submitted report should read ‘Flood Zone 1’ and not ‘2’.

·  Paragraph 52 should read ’21 2-beds 37.5%’ which would mean this sits above the relevant policy in terms of housing mix.

·  A CIL contribution of 321k is considered reasonable and will be provided.

·  Birth rates for 2022 have been looked at, and they are falling and continue to fall. Therefore, it is considered that education land is not required. 

·  The remitted SAP meant that there are allocations not going ahead, and there are 1,137 dwellings less than the SAP originally expected.

·  The site is not suitable  ...  view the full minutes text for item 71.

The date and time of the next meeting is proposed as Thursday, 8^th February 2024 at 1.30pm.

RESOLVED – To note the date and time of the next meeting as Thursday, 8^th February 2024 at 1.30pm.

(The meeting ended at 15:15).