Agenda item

Application 10/04404/FU - Junction of Moorhouse and Old Lane, Beeston, Leeds

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an application for the erection of a retail store with car parking and landscaping

Minutes:

The report of the Chief Planning Officer introduced an application for the erection of a retail store with car parking and landscaping at the junction of Moorhouse Avenue and Old Lane, Beeston.

 

Prior to the consideration of this item, Members were reminded of the subsequent application on the agenda which was also for a retail store at an adjacent location.  An emphasis was made on the need to consider each application individually and it was reported that both applications had been recommended for refusal on retail policy grounds.

 

Members had attended a site visit prior to the meeting and site plans and photographs were displayed.

 

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

 

  • The application had been submitted to Plans Panel (East) in September 2012 with a recommendation for approval.  Prior to that meeting, the application was withdrawn following objections for the applicant of the adjacent site.
  • Further letters of support and objection that had been received.
  • The applicant had stated that there were no alternative preferable sites in the locality.
  • The proposed development would be a single storey building that was commensurate with the height of nearby residential properties.
  • Existing access to the site would be used with pedestrian access off Old Lane.
  • TPO trees would be retained.
  • All other matters, including design were considered to be acceptable.
  • It was acknowledged that there were concerns regarding Dewsbury Road Town Centre and the applicant had been asked top consider alternative locations.

 

The applicant’s representative addressed the hearing.  The following issues were highlighted:

 

  • The application had been well supported locally as a result of public consultation.
  • There would be highway improvements.
  • The proposal would increase local employment opportunities and increase shopping choice in South Leeds.
  • The proposals would see the redevelopment of a derelict site.
  • In response to a Members question, it was reported that approximately 75% of staff employed would come form the immediate local area.
  • There had been a full retail impact assessment and it was not felt that the proposals would have a significant impact on any other areas.

 

Further to the applicants representations, it was reported that there was a difference of opinion between officers and the applicant with regards to the sequential test issue and the Council’s retail consultant was asked to address the meeting.  He raised the following issues:

 

  • Dewsbury Road Town Centre had not delivered full shopping facilities as expected and appropriate sites for development should be considered.
  • This proposal would reduce the commercial prospect of other operations on Dewsbury Road.
  • Reference to policy and strategy and the use of town centres.

 

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

 

  • Dewsbury Road Town Centre was identified in the UDP over 6 years ago and had still not been developed – it was felt that this policy may influence too heavily and could other ways of developing Dewsbury Road Town Centre be found.
  • The proposal would improve the area and create jobs.
  • If members were minded to vote against the recommendation it was reported that further work would need to be carried out for the cumulative impact on Beeston and Dewsbury Road Town Centre.
  • There were other examples of similar stores adjacent to each other elsewhere, should there be approval given to both applications then there would need to be a consideration of the Impact on traffic and other retail operations.

 

RESOLVED – That the officer recommendation for refusal be not accepted and the application be deferred for further negotiation.

 

Supporting documents: