Agenda item

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an application for two detached dwellings with associated landscaping

  Plans, photographs and graphics were displayed at the meeting.  A Members site visit had taken place earlier in the day

  Officers presented a report seeking approval for two detached dwellings with associated landscaping on land to the rear of 54 Weetwood Lane LS16

  Members were informed that this greenfield site was situated between the Far Headingley Conservation Area and Weetwood Lane Conservation Area, although the site itself did not benefit from any special designation

A Group Tree Preservation Order covered the site and whilst the removal of some trees was proposed, these would be largely fruit trees and immature scrub, with an appropriate replacement landscape scheme for the site being conditioned

  In terms of the principle of development, Officers considered this to be acceptable.  Two dwellings of traditional design and appearance were proposed to be constructed from natural materials and the site was relatively private, with the exception of the properties surrounding it.  Although the site was elevated from Hollin Lane, it was considered that distances of 61-70m away from properties on Hollin Lane far exceeded those set out in planning policy and as such it was felt that the proposals were not harmful to residential amenity

  There were no highways issues with the proposals and the existing site entrance would be widened, with an extension being formed to the existing driveway to create a private drive for both of the plots

  The Panel heard representations from the applicant’s agent and an objector who attended the meeting

  Members commented on the following matters:

·  the level of representations received in respect of the proposals, the nature of them and the level of consultation and engagement carried out on behalf of the applicant

·  that the proposals could be considered to be garden grabbing

·  the use of the land as an amenity site and the suggestion raised by objectors that a covenant existed preventing the land from being used for housing.  For clarity, the Chair invited the Panel’s legal representative to comment on this, with Members being informed that the issue of a covenant was a private matter and was not a planning consideration

·  the distance of the access road from the rear fence of dwellings on Hollin Lane, with Members being informed this was 4 metres

·  concern about the impact on amenity of residents on Hollin Lane

·  whether there were other measures which could be suggested to obscure the development from the existing dwellings.  On this point Members were advised that whilst a good landscaping scheme would soften and break up views of the new development, it would remain visible but that possible additional tree planting could be considered.  Whilst there would be the possibility of requiring a 2m high boundary fence to protect residential amenity, discussions should take place with adjoining residents to assess their views on this

·  highway concerns, including the use of the drive for delivery vehicles etc and the access onto Weetwood Lane

·  that lighting to the path should be considered

·  the view that the application did not comply with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

The Head of Planning Services advised that although the NPPF

referred to preference being given to brownfield sites, it did not prevent greenfield sites from being developed and that in reaching a decision, Members should have regard to the impact of the proposals; the local character and the need for local housing

  The Panel considered how to proceed

  Following an equity of votes for and against the recommendation, the Chair used his casting vote

  RESOLVED -  That the application be granted subject to the conditions set out in the submitted report